16:59:12 <RRSAgent> RRSAgent has joined #wpay
16:59:12 <RRSAgent> logging to http://www.w3.org/2015/02/12-wpay-irc
16:59:18 <manu> rrsagent, make logs public
16:59:30 <manu> zakim, room for 8 for 75 minutes?
16:59:32 <Zakim> ok, manu; conference Team_(wpay)16:59Z scheduled with code 9729 (WPAY) for 75 minutes until 1814Z
16:59:35 <manu> zakim, code?
16:59:35 <Zakim> the conference code is 9729 (tel:+1.617.761.6200 sip:zakim@voip.w3.org), manu
17:00:24 <Zakim> Team_(wpay)16:59Z has now started
17:00:30 <Zakim> +??P1
17:00:37 <Zakim> -??P1
17:00:39 <Zakim> Team_(wpay)16:59Z has ended
17:00:39 <Zakim> Attendees were
17:00:47 <manu> zakim, room for 8 for 75 minutes?
17:00:47 <Zakim> manu, an adhoc conference was scheduled here less than 2 minutes ago
17:01:28 <Zakim> Team_(wpay)16:59Z has now started
17:01:35 <Zakim> + +1.540.961.aaaa
17:01:39 <manu> zakim, ?aaaa is manu
17:01:39 <Zakim> sorry, manu, I do not recognize a party named '?aaaa'
17:01:43 <manu> zakim, aaaa is manu
17:01:43 <Zakim> +manu; got it
17:02:10 <Zakim> +Davd_Ezell
17:03:00 <dezell> zakim, Davd is me
17:03:00 <Zakim> +dezell; got it
17:03:14 <Zakim> +manu.a
17:03:42 <manu> zakim, manu.a is dlongley
17:03:42 <Zakim> +dlongley; got it
17:03:47 <manu> zakim, who is on the call?
17:03:47 <Zakim> On the phone I see manu, dezell, dlongley
17:03:49 <Laurent_> Laurent_ has joined #wpay
17:04:48 <Zakim> +Katie_Haritos-Shea
17:05:10 <Zakim> +dlongley.a
17:05:24 <manu> zakim, dlongley.a is dlehn
17:05:24 <Zakim> +dlehn; got it
17:05:34 <Zakim> + +33.1.55.01.aabb
17:05:47 <manu> zakim, aabb is Laurent_
17:05:47 <Zakim> +Laurent_; got it
17:06:19 <dlehn> dlehn has joined #wpay
17:06:45 <CyrilV> CyrilV has joined #wpay
17:07:08 <dezell> Scribe: Laurent_
17:07:16 <manu> Agenda: https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-webpayments-ig/2015Feb/0011.html
17:07:17 <dezell> scribenick: Laurent_
17:07:56 <Laurent_> Closed some edits after the face to face meeting
17:08:25 <manu> Laurent: I tried to send a mail to the mailing list - a couple of proposals for spec... the mail didn't go out. Don't know if you have a way to add me to the mailing list.
17:09:00 <manu> David: I think you may not be a member?
17:09:05 <manu> Laurent: I might have sent it to the wrong mailing list.
17:09:11 <Zakim> + +33.6.22.04.aacc
17:09:13 <manu> David: Send it to public-webpayments-ig@w3.org
17:09:18 <manu> zakim, aacc is CyrilV
17:09:18 <Zakim> +CyrilV; got it
17:09:25 <manu> Laurent: Hmm, I think I sent it there.
17:09:42 <manu> David: I'll take a look.
17:10:11 <manu> Manu: We can talk about it next week?
17:10:23 <manu> Laurent: I have a bunch of comments coming in for review.
17:11:03 <manu> Laurent: I'll send it use case by use case.
17:11:16 <manu> Topic: Agenda Bashing
17:11:25 <CyrilV> i sent also something on the pushed based
17:12:01 <manu> CyrilV, do you want to discuss on the call today?
17:12:32 <Laurent_> CyrilV: It's not to discussed today
17:13:08 <manu> manu: I'd rather send as little as possible to member-webpayments-ig@w3.org
17:13:24 <Laurent_> David: I'll resend the difference between member and public to CyrilV
17:14:12 <Laurent_> CyrilV I'll resend it to public-webpayments-ig@w3.org
17:14:28 <manu> s/CyrilV I'll/CyrilV: I'll/
17:15:03 <Laurent_> Manu: We'll review it next week to give people time to review the mail
17:15:19 <manu> Topic: Updated Use Cases Document
17:15:36 <manu> https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-webpayments-ig/2015Feb/0005.html
17:15:53 <Laurent_> Manu: this is the email that covers the changes
17:16:00 <manu> https://dvcs.w3.org/hg/webpayments/raw-file/default/latest/use-cases/index.html#toc
17:16:40 <Laurent_> Manu: In this doc you'll see the latest changes, reflecting most of charles desired changes
17:17:03 <Laurent_> Manu: lots of title changes (Laurent: couldn't follow them all)
17:17:10 <dezell> +1 it's a big improvement
17:17:12 <CyrilV> ok for this types of changes
17:17:25 <manu> Laurent: I think this is moving in the right direction - some of the use cases are just pieces of the flow instead of the full flow.
17:17:59 <manu> Laurent: We should take a look at a full payment flow - if I take an example - initiating a payment one, and the ... these are part of the push flow as described for the merchant/customer. So maybe it'll be interesting to merge.
17:18:14 <manu> Laurent: Similar - we need something for pull payments - payee-initiated.
17:19:06 <Laurent_> Laurent: We should change blinding to something else (in 3.2)
17:19:17 <Laurent_> s/Laurent:/Katie:/
17:20:06 <Laurent_> Manu: Something like "Partially Anonymizing Payment Information"
17:20:22 <dezell> q+
17:20:29 <manu> ack dezell
17:21:30 <Laurent_> dezell: First title doesn't refer to web browser but the text does, we should align things
17:22:01 <Laurent_> Manu: statement 1 is an acknowledgment of the problem. We should not be specific to the browser.
17:22:34 <Laurent_> Manu: We need more comments(?) on the use cases, to make sure we're talking about the web not only the browser
17:23:34 <manu> Laurent: Could we use the term user agent instead of browser?
17:24:25 <Laurent_> Manu: It's typical but might add complexity since we have a User Payment Agent that may or may not be the User Agent
17:24:28 <dezell> +1 to using "user agent" as a start toward abstraction.
17:24:53 <Laurent_> Manu: User Payment Agent doesn't need to be a part of the browser
17:25:18 <Laurent_> Manu: In the F2F it wasn't clear what the motivations for each use cases was
17:25:33 <Laurent_> Manu: Detail section really were the motivations
17:25:42 <manu> https://dvcs.w3.org/hg/webpayments/raw-file/default/latest/use-cases/index.html#payer-initiated-funds-transfer
17:26:32 <dlongley> +1
17:26:34 <Laurent_> Manu: Now every single use case has a motivation section replacing detail one
17:26:43 <manu> Laurent: Yes, good change.
17:26:45 <CyrilV> +1
17:27:49 <Laurent_> Manu: We had to explain push vs pull based
17:28:19 <Laurent_> Manu: People are going to continue being confused by that
17:28:21 <CyrilV> my view is to structure in / card Pyament
17:28:26 <Laurent_> +1 on payee and payer-initiated
17:29:00 <dezell> +1 to payer-initiated/payee-initiated
17:29:30 <Laurent_> Manu: Changes is push-based = "payer-initiated", pull-based = "payee-initiated"
17:29:33 <manu> Laurent: Good change - I suggest putting it as a glossary-item like thing... it's not quite a use case...
17:29:35 <dezell> q+
17:30:16 <manu> Laurent: It's worth having it in the glossary, and it may be important to call out why it's important to the work. Explain why payer-initiated and payee-initiated is important.
17:30:24 <manu> ack dezell
17:30:27 <CyrilV> payee initiated is divided into 2 different type of schemes : card system / direct debit. maybe we could make the difference ?
17:31:20 <dezell> +1 to adding the definitions.
17:31:45 <dlongley> q+
17:31:50 <manu> ack dlongley
17:32:00 <CyrilV> q+
17:32:14 <Laurent_> dlongley: Still might be some confusion about payer-initiated vs payee-initiated
17:33:09 <Laurent_> dlongley: use case 2.6 is a bit different than what we described
17:34:03 <Laurent_> dlongley: We don't know if it refers to fund transfer or the payment itself
17:34:07 <manu> ack CyrilV
17:35:14 <Laurent_> CyrilV: Payee initiated can refer to multiple schemes, I'm not sure we need to distinguish between payer/payee initiated
17:36:05 <manu> Laurent: What Manu and I are talking about is who initiated the payment. The financial transfer in the back-end isn't necessarily what we're talking about.
17:36:38 <manu> Laurent: It's whether or not the customer initiated the transfer. This is important wrt. message exchange between payer and payee. It has some effect on message itself.
17:36:55 <dlongley> "Who controls when the actual money moves, the payer (push) or the payee (pull)?"
17:37:24 <Laurent_> Manu: This generalization is too great a generalization
17:38:18 <Laurent_> Manu: Front-end messaging, refering to payer/payee initiated, and a completely different set of messages in the back end (credit/debit/card/...) referring to the way funds are transferred
17:38:53 <dlongley> "clearance/settlement initiation"?
17:39:00 <manu> Laurent: In the mail I'm going to send to the list - I have a proposal, hopefully that'll solve part of the problem.
17:39:49 <Laurent_> Manu: Last change was around Partially Blinding Payment Information. Still pose some issues for some in the group
17:40:05 <dlongley> "Omitting"
17:40:08 <dlongley> ^
17:40:16 <Laurent_> Manu: We'll have a discussion by email
17:42:07 <manu> https://dvcs.w3.org/hg/webpayments/raw-file/default/latest/use-cases/index.html#toc
17:42:13 <Laurent_> Manu: Any comments on this particular set of changes?
17:42:40 <Laurent_> Manu: Any missing changes from F2F?
17:43:37 <manu> Topic: Reviews and Additions to Use Cases
17:43:50 <Laurent_> Manu: Next topic - reviews and additions
17:44:41 <manu> ACTION: Laurent to perform a full review for the Use Cases FPWD.
17:44:42 <trackbot> Created ACTION-63 - Perform a full review for the use cases fpwd. [on Laurent Castillo - due 2015-02-19].
17:44:48 <Laurent_> Manu: Any volunteer for doing a full review of the document?
17:44:49 <manu> ACTION: Chaals to perform a full review for the Use Cases FPWD.
17:44:49 <trackbot> Created ACTION-64 - Perform a full review for the use cases fpwd. [on Charles McCathie Nevile - due 2015-02-19].
17:46:31 <Laurent_> ???: In the face 2 face we discussed having basic flows, or a set of steps as a basis for the discussion
17:46:44 <Laurent_> +1 to wroking on flows
17:47:06 <Laurent_> s/???:/dezell:/
17:47:12 <CyrilV> my document try to provide basic flows
17:47:12 <manu> ACTION: Manu to add "basic flow" to each use case as well as nouns (actors) and verbs (actions).
17:47:12 <trackbot> Created ACTION-65 - Add "basic flow" to each use case as well as nouns (actors) and verbs (actions). [on Manu Sporny - due 2015-02-19].
17:47:26 <CyrilV> q+
17:47:31 <manu> ack CyrilV
17:47:40 <Laurent_> dezell: We need to have steps and flows with common verbs/actions
17:47:55 <CyrilV> I LL FIX AND COMME BACK
17:48:16 <CyrilV> q+
17:48:30 <Laurent_> Manu: There was a request for images for each basic flows
17:48:55 <dezell> +.5 to images - very nice, but also nice to have
17:49:04 <Laurent_> Manu: It should probably be one of the last thing we do
17:49:08 <manu> Laurent: It would be nice to have a sequence diagram - if it helps, I can send a link.
17:49:10 <CyrilV>  q+
17:49:23 <manu> ack CyrilV
17:49:30 <dlongley> +.5 to images, nice to have, but agree should be done last as they are harder to edit (takes time)
17:49:45 <Laurent_> CyrilV: I've sent basic flows explaining SCT and Bill Payment flows
17:50:03 <Laurent_> CyrilV: Tell me if those are useful / the kind of things we want to include
17:50:09 <CyrilV> I volunteer
17:50:40 <Laurent_> Manu: Looks like it's exactly the kind of flows we want to have
17:51:28 <CyrilV> +q
17:51:35 <manu> Here's an example of Requirements: https://dvcs.w3.org/hg/webpayments/raw-file/default/latest/use-cases/index.html#initiating-a-payment
17:51:48 <Laurent_> Manu: Every single use cases have requirements, anybody against / for it?
17:52:30 <Laurent_> dezell: Some requirements were kind of bizarre
17:52:34 <dlongley> q+
17:53:01 <Laurent_> Katie: maybe we should hide the requirement piece for now
17:53:23 <manu> ACTION: Manu to remove the "Requirements" sections and replace them with "Preconditions" and "Postconditions".
17:53:23 <trackbot> Created ACTION-66 - Remove the "requirements" sections and replace them with "preconditions" and "postconditions". [on Manu Sporny - due 2015-02-19].
17:53:42 <dlongley> q-
17:54:12 <dlongley> +1 to keeping the requirements around, they are very useful for designing solutions; they've distilled out the important elements from the use cases and we don't want to do that work again
17:54:12 <Laurent_> CyrilV: We have to define the use cases and only then define the requirements
17:54:27 <dlongley> but they can be hidden/moved elsewhere
17:54:33 <Laurent_> CyrilV: otherwise we drive to a specific solution
17:55:25 <Laurent_> dlongley: We can move them somewhere else as long as we keep them somewhere
17:55:33 <dlongley> q+
17:55:40 <CyrilV> q-
17:55:50 <manu> Laurent: I'm fine with requirements being put somewhere else, but having it somewhere else is important. Design goals / requirements maybe.
17:55:59 <manu> ack dlongley
17:56:40 <Laurent_> dlongley: We might have some difficulties since some requirements looks like preconditions
17:57:48 <dlongley> q+
17:58:16 <dezell> q+
17:58:18 <Laurent_> dlongley: Goals are different from motivations
17:58:22 <dezell> ack dlo
17:58:40 <CyrilV> q+
17:58:49 <manu> Manu: We may want to add a "Goals" section in the Introductory section?
17:59:27 <manu> ack dezell
17:59:30 <dezell> ack dezell
17:59:38 <Laurent_> dezell: Agree with Dave - we stick with motivations, Goals are in many documents and will be difficult to synchronize
18:00:20 <Laurent_> CyrilV: I can understand "Design Goals" but not "Goal" standalone - it's too broad
18:01:00 <dlongley> +1
18:01:31 <manu> Manu: The group is saying that they don't think a "Goals" section in the "Introduction" section is appropriate at this point in time.
18:01:35 <dezell> +1
18:01:43 <manu> Manu: Goals should probably be in the Roadmap document, and only there.
18:02:36 <Zakim> -Katie_Haritos-Shea
18:02:37 <Zakim> -manu
18:02:38 <Zakim> -dlongley
18:02:39 <Zakim> -dlehn
18:02:39 <Zakim> -dezell
18:02:43 <Zakim> -CyrilV
18:02:44 <Zakim> -Laurent_
18:02:46 <Zakim> Team_(wpay)16:59Z has ended
18:02:46 <Zakim> Attendees were +1.540.961.aaaa, manu, Davd_Ezell, dezell, dlongley, Katie_Haritos-Shea, dlehn, +33.1.55.01.aabb, Laurent_, +33.6.22.04.aacc, CyrilV
18:03:16 <dlongley> dlongley has left #wpay
18:05:30 <manu> Present: David_Ezell, David_Longley, David_Lehn, Laurent, Katie, Cyril, Manu
18:05:34 <manu> rrsagent, make minutes
18:05:34 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2015/02/12-wpay-minutes.html manu
18:08:30 <manu> rrsagent, make logs public
18:08:36 <manu> rrsagent, draft minutes
18:08:36 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2015/02/12-wpay-minutes.html manu
18:09:13 <manu> Meeting: Web Payments IG - Use Cases Task Force
18:09:36 <manu> Chair: Manu
18:10:31 <manu> s/Scribe: Laurent_/Scribe: manu/
18:10:47 <manu> s/scribenick: Laurent_//
18:11:37 <manu> s/Laurent: I'll send it use case by use case./scribenick: Laurent_/
18:12:03 <manu> s/in for review./in for review, I'll send comments in use case by use case/
18:12:03 <manu> rrsagent, draft minutes
18:12:03 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2015/02/12-wpay-minutes.html manu
18:12:51 <manu> s/charles/Chaals/
18:14:20 <manu> s/I LL FIX AND COMME BACK//
18:15:02 <manu> rrsagent, make minutes
18:15:02 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2015/02/12-wpay-minutes.html manu
18:18:04 <manu> Scribe: Laurent
18:18:11 <manu> rrsagent, publish minutes
18:18:11 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2015/02/12-wpay-minutes.html manu
18:19:18 <manu> rrsagent, bye
18:19:18 <RRSAgent> I see 4 open action items saved in http://www.w3.org/2015/02/12-wpay-actions.rdf :
18:19:18 <RRSAgent> ACTION: Laurent to perform a full review for the Use Cases FPWD. [1]
18:19:18 <RRSAgent>   recorded in http://www.w3.org/2015/02/12-wpay-irc#T17-44-41
18:19:18 <RRSAgent> ACTION: Chaals to perform a full review for the Use Cases FPWD. [2]
18:19:18 <RRSAgent>   recorded in http://www.w3.org/2015/02/12-wpay-irc#T17-44-49
18:19:18 <RRSAgent> ACTION: Manu to add "basic flow" to each use case as well as nouns (actors) and verbs (actions). [3]
18:19:18 <RRSAgent>   recorded in http://www.w3.org/2015/02/12-wpay-irc#T17-47-12-1
18:19:18 <RRSAgent> ACTION: Manu to remove the "Requirements" sections and replace them with "Preconditions" and "Postconditions". [4]
18:19:18 <RRSAgent>   recorded in http://www.w3.org/2015/02/12-wpay-irc#T17-53-23
18:19:20 <manu> zakim, bye
18:19:20 <Zakim> Zakim has left #wpay