Summary of issues. Re: CfC to publish documents as FPWD of the Web Payments WG

Previous Topic Next Topic
 
classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
3 messages Options
Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Summary of issues. Re: CfC to publish documents as FPWD of the Web Payments WG

Anders Rundgren-2
For the record only...

- The Web Payment API concept requires major rewrites of existing checkout solutions

- The need for payment method registration in the browser adds a new user/issuer step to the plot

- The interface to native wallets is essentially undefined

- The scheme does not include a security solution, it is supposed to be provided by other parties

Anders (non-member)

Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: Summary of issues. Re: CfC to publish documents as FPWD of the Web Payments WG

Chaals McCathie Nevile
Anders,

(and anyone else who wants to archive random assertions)

this is a list for tag discussion. Please don't use it as your web archive.

cheers

On Sat, 09 Apr 2016 07:30:46 +0200, Anders Rundgren  
<[hidden email]> wrote:

> For the record only...
>
> - The Web Payment API concept requires major rewrites of existing  
> checkout solutions
>
> - The need for payment method registration in the browser adds a new  
> user/issuer step to the plot
>
> - The interface to native wallets is essentially undefined
>
> - The scheme does not include a security solution, it is supposed to be  
> provided by other parties
>
> Anders (non-member)
>


--
Charles McCathie Nevile - web standards - CTO Office, Yandex
  [hidden email] - - - Find more at http://yandex.com

Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: Summary of issues. Re: CfC to publish documents as FPWD of the Web Payments WG

Anders Rundgren-2
On 2016-04-09 15:46, Chaals McCathie Nevile wrote:
> Anders,
>
> (and anyone else who wants to archive random assertions)

Since the Web Payment API builds on that it orchestrates both payment method
selection and execution, it effectively requires a complete rewrite of these
parts of a Web shop.  That's trivial to verify.  It is possible that such
down-to-earth considerations of APIs are outside of the TAG scope.

There is much more to say about this but if nobody is interested in
[fundamentally] diverging views, there's indeed no point continuing.

Personally, I continue along the path I have described in detail until
somebody comes up with something really awesome. Since Web Payments
have only marginally improved the last 20 years, it seems that I have
plenty of time perfecting these ideas :-)

Well, maybe Apple's anticipated Web adoption of Apple Pay will provide
the market with the missing data.  I'm really looking forward to this!

Anders

>
> this is a list for tag discussion. Please don't use it as your web archive.
>
> cheers
>
> On Sat, 09 Apr 2016 07:30:46 +0200, Anders Rundgren
> <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
>> For the record only...
>>
>> - The Web Payment API concept requires major rewrites of existing
>> checkout solutions
>>
>> - The need for payment method registration in the browser adds a new
>> user/issuer step to the plot
>>
>> - The interface to native wallets is essentially undefined
>>
>> - The scheme does not include a security solution, it is supposed to be
>> provided by other parties
>>
>> Anders (non-member)
>>
>
>


Loading...