Re: State and fate of the PaymentHandler API

On 2017-08-07 03:31, Marcos Caceres wrote:
> On August 5, 2017 at 4:53:10 PM, Anders Rundgren
> (anders.rundgren.net@gmail.com) wrote:
>> Deciphering how the W3C payment effort matches the existing and anticipated payment
>> landscape doesn't take hours to disentangle; it can easily take several weeks.
> 
> Anders, please refrain from starting new threads around this topic at
> the TAG - you already raised this issue in the context of the Web
> Payments WG. Let's conclude discussions over in the appropriate Github
> issue, and not consume the TAG's time with stuff that the WG is well
> capable of resolving on its own.

If you reread my posting it describes an objection to the PaymentHandler
which is way outside of what W3C's GitHub was designed for.

The following posting from a prominent WG member shows another side:
https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-webpayments-ig/2015Jul/0203.html

     "I don't think there'll be much enthusiasm in the merchant services
      industry for a specification which sets out to disintermediate
      acquirer/processor/gateways in its Scope statement"

Due that the WG scope was reduced to only cover merchant and user interactions.

However, the payment world outside of the WG doesn't care and are actively using
Web payment schemes like: https://www.ideal.nl/demo/en/?screens=dskweb
which indeed takes the card industry out of the equation.

On a more technical level there are tons of issues including the decision to merge
- Payment method display
- Payment method selection
- Payment method execution
into a single super method without first verifying that nothing else is possible.

Anders

Received on Monday, 7 August 2017 05:34:04 UTC