13:45:30 RRSAgent has joined #wpay 13:45:30 logging to http://www.w3.org/2015/04/23-wpay-irc 13:45:35 zakim, this will be way 13:45:35 I do not see a conference matching that name scheduled within the next hour, Ian 13:45:40 zakim, list 13:45:40 I see Team_Systems(AUTO)3:00AM, Team_Global(review)8:00AM, Team_(wai-kz)13:20Z active 13:45:42 also scheduled at this time are MM_MMI(EMMA)10:00AM, Math_IG()10:00AM, WAI_PFWG(HTML TF)10:00AM, I18N_WG()10:00AM, WAI_HTML AT()10:00AM, SYMM_TTWG()10:00AM, UW_DAP()10:00AM, 13:45:42 ... WAI_EOWG()10:00AM, T&S_WEBPYMT(WPAY_USE)10:00AM, WAI_ERTWG(Eval TF)10:00AM, WAI_ARIA TF(ARIA)9:00AM, I18N_BPMLOD()10:00AM, WAI_WCAG()10:00AM 13:46:18 zakim, this will be WEBPYMT 13:46:18 ok, Ian; I see T&S_WEBPYMT(WPAY_USE)10:00AM scheduled to start in 14 minutes 13:46:29 Meeting: Web Payments Interest Group 13:46:37 agenda: https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-webpayments-ig/2015Apr/0127.html 13:47:17 Meeting: Web Payments Use Cases Task Force 13:47:23 agenda: https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-webpayments-ig/2015Apr/0139.html 13:47:49 agenda+ Publication Timeline for Payment Agent 13:47:56 agenda+ architecture discussions of Pat/Ian 13:48:00 agenda+ work items (general) 13:53:38 jtjia has joined #wpay 13:54:41 padler has joined #wpay 13:55:11 manu has joined #wpay 13:58:33 zakim, this will be wpay 13:58:33 ok, manu; I see T&S_WEBPYMT(WPAY_USE)10:00AM scheduled to start in 2 minutes 13:58:46 rrsagent, draft minutes 13:58:46 I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2015/04/23-wpay-minutes.html manu 13:58:55 AdrianHB has joined #wpay 13:59:45 zakim, call Ian-Office 13:59:45 ok, Ian; the call is being made 13:59:46 T&S_WEBPYMT(WPAY_USE)10:00AM has now started 13:59:48 +Ian 13:59:54 agenda? 13:59:58 +??P21 14:00:08 zakim, ??P21 is Adria 14:00:08 +Adria; got it 14:00:19 zakim, Adria is Adrian 14:00:19 +Adrian; got it 14:00:42 +manu 14:01:31 agenda+ Manu on Payments 2015 14:02:33 zakim, who's here? 14:02:33 On the phone I see Ian, Adrian, manu 14:02:35 On IRC I see AdrianHB, manu, padler, RRSAgent, Zakim, ShaneM, dsr, jiajiangtao, Karen, trackbot, wseltzer_transit, Ian 14:02:48 Regrets: Pat 14:03:09 +Dsr 14:03:20 Agenda: https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-webpayments-ig/2015Apr/0139.html 14:03:20 Regrets all, I will try to follow/stay on IRC for clarification... however I have a work conflict and will not be able to join via voice.. 14:04:16 agenda? 14:04:39 zakim, take up item 1 14:04:39 agendum 1. "Publication Timeline for Payment Agent" taken up [from Ian] 14:04:54 Manu: Reminder - we are focusing on payment agent on both THurs and Fri calls... 14:05:11 zakim, close item 1 14:05:11 agendum 1, Publication Timeline for Payment Agent, closed 14:05:12 I see 3 items remaining on the agenda; the next one is 14:05:12 2. architecture discussions of Pat/Ian [from Ian] 14:05:14 zakim, take up item 4 14:05:14 agendum 4. "Manu on Payments 2015" taken up [from Ian] 14:05:15 Topic: Payments 2015 Review 14:05:26 scribe: Ian 14:05:34 zakim, what is the code? 14:05:34 the conference code is 9729 (tel:+1.617.761.6200 sip:zakim@voip.w3.org), ShaneM 14:05:41 Manu: at the conf - david jackson, claudia, and I went to Payments 2015 14:05:54 ...also @@ from ISO 12812 did a panel on payments standards 14:05:58 ...well-received! 14:06:11 +[ApTest] 14:06:12 ...large/small financial institutions and technology companies 14:06:18 zakim, I am ApTest 14:06:18 ok, ShaneM, I now associate you with [ApTest] 14:06:24 ...there was little knowledge about the web payments work, so it was good that we were able to get the message out 14:06:38 ...I will follow up with Ian separately about potential participants 14:08:22 Were there any announcements/topics at the conference that would impact or be important to our work that should be considered? 14:10:23 IJ: Please do not send invitations to roundtable without discussing with staff. Thanks! 14:11:08 -[ApTest] 14:12:48 Manu: US Fed Faster Payments task force first meeting is end of April 14:12:54 ..I've signed up my org 14:13:08 ...I'm happy to act as a liaison until such time as you get involved directly. 14:14:33 +ShaneM 14:15:31 Manu: 12812 looking heavily into credentials work 14:15:51 ...People are excited to see W3C taking on some of this work 14:16:01 zakim, mute me 14:16:01 ShaneM should now be muted 14:16:37 IJ: How can we reach these people more effectively? 14:16:51 Manu: They may hear about work through consultants like Booz Allen 14:16:59 ...in our other groups we've had some success doing short videos 14:17:11 ...that's how many people learned about our linked data and credentials work 14:17:19 ...conferences for now are our best bet. 14:17:20 q? 14:21:10 Topic: Update on Payment Agent Status 14:21:11 zakim, close item 4 14:21:11 agendum 4, Manu on Payments 2015, closed 14:21:12 I see 2 items remaining on the agenda; the next one is 14:21:12 2. architecture discussions of Pat/Ian [from Ian] 14:21:14 scribenick: manu 14:21:30 Jackson has joined #wpay 14:21:30 Ian: I met with Pat earlier this week - unorganized summary of what happened: 14:21:59 Ian: We discussed a lot about document structure, strong agreement that a strong analysis of the use cases are important to tease out requirements. 14:22:18 +DavidJ 14:22:26 Ian: We've been debating how to do the analysis - had a fairly lengthy discussion about whether we should tag things as we go, or look for patterns after the fact, or have a more thoughtful catalog. 14:23:00 Ian: Pat's approach has been to work with people to come up ith a checklist - so we have a systematic view of use cases - so we have privacy issues/usability covered. 14:23:38 Ian: We spent a good bit of time talking about how to organize analysis - then we talked about more architectural discussions - wrote lots of stuff on whiteboard - sort of beginning to model things. We cheated - didn't get to the analysis, concluded this is how we'll do analysis - looked at modelling again. 14:24:44 Ian: I thought it was okay - there was a feedback loop there - be aware of these things as we do the analysis - we did not complete the analysis nor the modeling, that's why we have another call today. Hoped to have a big scratch pad by the end of today... here's what we came up with - here's the analysis - have the group look at it - confirm whether these issues arise... 14:25:06 Ian: Don't know if we'll get to that today - it was a good discussion - I've had to talk to people about emerging architecture... better grip on it. 14:25:40 Ian: Talking to them about emerging web of payment agents - also, coming up with charters - we need to understand as rapidly as possible, the space we're going to cover - that's why we need to spend big chunks of time on that. 14:25:41 q+ 14:25:45 q- 14:26:03 q+ to say I'd like to join the call this afternoon, and A?? question. 14:26:08 ack manu 14:26:08 manu, you wanted to say I'd like to join the call this afternoon, and A?? question. 14:26:46 It would be great if the team could send thoughts on requirements to the list as well as any key thoughts on vision/drivers for what they need out of the architecture.. 14:27:22 Manu: I'd like to join the discussion - we've built systems that do this stuff. 14:27:41 Ian: I don't think we're there yet - it's mostly been talking about analysis or how we do analysis. 14:27:50 q+ to ask about A. 14:28:21 Ian: It's not quite that we're discussing architecture - it's really about how to do the analysis. How we do architecture influences how we go about analysis - feedback loop. 14:28:24 ack manu 14:28:24 manu, you wanted to ask about A. 14:30:57 q+ to ask about who we are talking to at Microsoft 14:31:29 ack adrian 14:31:29 AdrianHB, you wanted to ask about who we are talking to at Microsoft 14:33:32 +Davd_Ezell 14:33:57 dezell has joined #wpay 14:37:06 agenda? 14:37:13 zakim, close item 2 14:37:13 agendum 2, architecture discussions of Pat/Ian, closed 14:37:14 I see 1 item remaining on the agenda: 14:37:14 3. work items (general) [from Ian] 14:37:31 zakim, take up item 3 14:37:31 agendum 3. "work items (general)" taken up [from Ian] 14:37:48 IJ: I want to get together with Pat today and then share something with the group 14:38:08 Manu: I am chomping at the bit to see what we can actually write (e.g,. introductory parts of the document, or digital receipt requirements) 14:38:25 s/chomping/champing/ 14:39:54 Ian: We didn't come to any decision per se. I have to do several things - action item around draft charters - working w/ staff - Jeff on question of draft charter/charters for work. Also trying to get staff perspective for prioritization - important piece of work. For us to propose standards work, we need to prioritize what needs to happen in first volley of standards. 14:40:17 Ian: What's the minimal amount of standardization we need to have the impact we want to have for some payment to happen? 14:40:38 jiajiangtao has joined #wpay 14:40:53 Ian: It's all tied up together - use cases, architecture, planning. For example, in Pat's taxonomy - taxation appears - not covered in use cases today, there has been discussion in the group about it to make it possible. 14:41:03 Ian: That does not feel like a v1 priority, though. 14:41:22 Ian: So, similarly, faster settlement is not a v1 thing, but we do have a task force for that to figure out what needs to be done. They should do stuff. 14:41:38 Ian: In terms of recommending what needs to be standardized in August, that's not a v1 thing. 14:41:59 q+ to ask about basic technologies that need to be there - does that list exist? 14:42:14 Ian: To say "ok we're going to need this" - we need to model stuff so that we enable extensibility. 14:42:28 Ian: We don't want to boil the ocean. 14:42:29 ack manu 14:42:29 manu, you wanted to ask about basic technologies that need to be there - does that list exist? 14:42:51 manu: Do we have a list of features / things that the system absolutely has to be there. 14:42:57 ...I Have a list in my head. 14:43:08 ...e.g., some form of digital signature format 14:43:15 ...e.g., some form of browser-based API to initiate payment 14:43:32 ... also some kind of extensible data format. 14:43:50 Ian: Extensible format is not yet a functional requirement. 14:44:00 Ian: Do we want digital receipts in v1 - that is the kind of question I'm asking. 14:44:58 Ian: I'm trying not to say we do or don't need it - maybe we should collate features - receipts, loyalty programs/vouchers, I don't know if digital signatures rise to feature or not, I can't tell. The ability to select payment instruments and invoke payment agents from the browser. It's a mix of features/functions - what's the minimal set that's necessary. 14:45:18 Ian: The farther out we get, the more vague it'll be. The next round will include X, then Y. We have a list and incremental standardization goals. 14:45:36 Ian: If you have it in your head, and you want to create a tiered view of features - that would be compelling. 14:45:41 https://www.w3.org/Payments/IG/wiki/Main_Page/FTF_June2015#Agenda_notes 14:45:53 Ian: The face-to-face agenda notes that we need to have a compelling Agenda... including roundtable. 14:46:19 Ian: That page is very drafty... We are starting to put in things we want to talk about. Part 1 - getting to standards work - prioritization of existing use cases. 14:46:34 Ian: If you were to have a strawman - what we need in v1 - that would be great input into that agenda 14:46:38 q? 14:46:39 q+ to talk about needing v1 features before 14:46:42 ack manu 14:46:42 manu, you wanted to talk about needing v1 features before 14:47:12 manu: Are we trying to do a FPWD of Payment Agent before the June F2F? 14:47:34 Ian: It's fine to say "big picture" and "here's what we're going to do". We can do picture and then prioritization. 14:47:49 Ian: Our timeline says FPWD in June - tentative, the 9th of June. 14:48:07 Ian: I think it would be awesome if we do that - have a strong editor's draft - resolve at F2F to publish it. 14:48:22 Ian: it may make the most sense to do that as a face-to-face decision - if it's controversial. 14:48:33 q+ to ask about use case analysis that is still required 14:48:34 q+ we need v1 features before. 14:48:40 q+ to say we need v1 features before. 14:48:44 ack AdrianHB 14:48:44 AdrianHB, you wanted to ask about use case analysis that is still required 14:48:45 ack Ad 14:49:22 AdrianHB: The fact that our use cases is broken into phases/subphases is partly analysis. 14:49:30 ...can we split the work based on those phases? 14:49:40 AdrianHB: Two questions - You said that you and Pat have a lot of analysis you want to do on use cases. The fact that our use case document is broken out into phases and sub-phases - that's a pretty good bit of up-front analysis. First thing is - can we split work out on those phases? A group goes off and does Negotiation of Payment Terms. 14:49:41 ...IE, start with Phase 1, then Phase 2, .... 14:50:01 AdrianHB: There is interaction across those groups - but breaking it out in that way feels natural. Common phases, common steps between phases. 14:51:03 Ian: I want to distinguish how we organize the work from the analysis - when I look at very first use case - someone goes to HobbyCo website one - I expect to sit down and say "What's implied by this". It assumes there is technology to display an offer - that already happens today, no new standards necessary. However, if we want a standard vocab expressible in other means for expression of an offer/invoice. What's the priority of producing a standard vocabulary fo 14:51:03 r an offer? 14:51:13 Ian: Benefit being search engines can find it - API might need it. 14:51:31 Ian: So, group may say it's really important. vocabulary for offers not as important as one for receipts. 14:52:03 AdrianHB: I follow and agree - it feels a bit like boiling the ocean - we're trying to do that across all use cases... all in one go. You can ask those same questions, and will get the same answers in manageable blocks. 14:52:31 AdrianHB: Negotiation of payment terms - first step - look at offer - generic discovery of offer step - what's required for "offers to be discovered"? 14:52:53 ack manu 14:52:53 manu, you wanted to say we need v1 features before. 14:52:53 AdrianHB: We ask the same analytical question you're asking - how do we break this up so it doesn't feel like such a huge task. Can we partition the work. 14:53:22 Manu: +1 to Adrian's thoughts...if you and Pat and come to a strawman proposal this week, then things are cool. If not, we need to distribute more. 14:53:30 ...I think we need the v1 feature set in advance of the FTF. 14:53:40 That has been the focus.. is breaking it down so that we can distribute the work and move more quickly. 14:53:52 ...the CG has been looking at this space for 3 years...so I think I have a good idea of a v1 feature set. 14:54:08 ...I can try to back up why I think the feature set maps to the use cases. 14:54:26 ...the approach that I would take is to take the document in its entirety at a high level 14:54:39 -Davd_Ezell 14:54:50 ...e.g., writing something like "it's event to me that we need digital signatures on some of this data, otherwise merchants can't trust what the user is giving them." 14:54:56 ...push payments in particular.... 14:55:19 +Davd_Ezell 14:55:42 ian: If you can get this stuff in to do draft priortization before F2F - that's great. 14:56:03 Ian: I didn't want it to be unmoored - "from these use cases we know we're going to need X" is good. 14:56:19 Ian: There's kinda a flat list of features - tease out dependencies and priortization - that's good news. 14:56:32 ACTION: Manu to try and map minimal v1 features to use cases. 14:56:32 Created ACTION-94 - Try and map minimal v1 features to use cases. [on Manu Sporny - due 2015-04-30]. 14:56:57 Happy to assist on that ACTION 14:56:58 q? 14:57:02 topic: Agenda review 14:57:06 https://www.w3.org/Payments/IG/wiki/Main_Page/FTF_June2015#Agenda_notes 14:57:20 Adrian - if you could go at it from your angle - that would be great... 14:57:50 Ian: We could do prioritization of use cases as an hour long item? 14:58:45 Manu: I think we want to do prioritzation of use cases before F2F meeting. 14:58:53 Ian: Yes, we want to do as much as possible before F2F. 14:59:06 q+ to ask about any brief list of topics for Monday? 14:59:18 ACTION: Manu to try and gather Prioritization of use cases before F2F. 14:59:18 Created ACTION-95 - Try and gather prioritization of use cases before f2f. [on Manu Sporny - due 2015-04-30]. 14:59:37 ack d 14:59:38 dezell, you wanted to ask about any brief list of topics for Monday? 14:59:57 dezell: Do these discussions merit any time on our Monday call? 15:00:13 Ian: I think going to the group on Monday w/ whatever Agenda we have in draft form and walking through it would be good. 15:00:20 -DavidJ 15:00:27 Ian: Let's go over what we have on Monday - Agenda notes. 15:00:32 dezell: ok, sounds good. 15:01:03 Ian: I do expect to have charter review - put an hour there - manifestation of what we mean by prioritization standards work... 15:01:26 Ian: So, "we're going to standardize this" - next steps - can be provocative - credentials, blockchain, etc. 15:01:38 q+ to ask about Payment Agent vs Architechture (are these the same?) 15:01:43 Ian: New topics - like talking about settlement - value-add task force - go in and edit or send notes. 15:01:52 Ian: Payment Agent and Architecture are the same - 15:02:01 Ian: to respond to Adrian's question. 15:02:34 -Ian 15:02:42 ack AdrianHB 15:02:42 AdrianHB, you wanted to ask about Payment Agent vs Architechture (are these the same?) 15:02:59 AdrianHB: We have a Payment Agent Task Force that's preparing a Payment Architecture document - is the Payment Agent a subset of that work. 15:03:55 Manu: Payment Agent is a subset of Payment Architecture. 15:04:54 dezell: People that joined group had a wallet in mind, we morphed it into Payment Agent because it did more than wallet - flow to be distributed in various ways, in various scenarios - payment agent is a term that we use to be "the software executing the value exchange on behalf of the payer/payee/payment service, etc." 15:05:07 dezell: Some sort of vision to start WGs - payment agent is important. 15:05:21 AdrianHB: We need to get consensus on the definitions. 15:05:34 dezell: The call for payment agent is tomorrow - this would be a good topic for that call. 15:05:35 -Dsr 15:05:50 AdrianHB: Yes, I understand the definition - may not be obvious to other folks reading the documents. 15:06:58 -ShaneM 15:07:31 -Adrian 15:07:34 -manu 15:07:35 -Davd_Ezell 15:07:36 T&S_WEBPYMT(WPAY_USE)10:00AM has ended 15:07:36 Attendees were Ian, Adrian, manu, Dsr, [ApTest], ShaneM, DavidJ, Davd_Ezell 15:07:42 exit 15:09:09 Present: Ian, Manu, DavidE, Adrian, DaveRaggett, DavidJackson, PatAdler(IRC) 15:09:17 rrsagent, draft minutes 15:09:17 I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2015/04/23-wpay-minutes.html manu 15:09:39 rrsagent, make minutes public 15:09:39 I'm logging. I don't understand 'make minutes public', manu. Try /msg RRSAgent help 15:09:44 rrsagent, make logs public 15:09:47 rrsagent, draft minutes 15:09:47 I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2015/04/23-wpay-minutes.html manu 15:26:11 Chair: Manu 15:26:38 Meeting: WPIG Use Cases / Payment Agent Task Force 15:27:03 s/Topic: Manu on Payments 2015// 15:27:15 rrsagent, draft minutes 15:27:15 I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2015/04/23-wpay-minutes.html manu 15:30:53 s/exit// 15:31:24 s/agendum 1. "Publication Timeline for Payment Agent" taken up [from Ian]// 15:31:26 rrsagent, draft minutes 15:31:26 I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2015/04/23-wpay-minutes.html manu 15:32:01 s/agendum 4. "Manu on Payments 2015" taken up [from Ian]// 15:32:38 s/Topic: Payments 2015 Review/Topic: Payments 2015 Conference Summary/ 15:32:40 rrsagent, draft minutes 15:32:40 I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2015/04/23-wpay-minutes.html manu 15:36:17 s/A??// 15:36:23 s/A.// 15:36:35 rrsagent, draft minutes 15:36:35 I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2015/04/23-wpay-minutes.html manu 15:48:00 s/Meeting: Web Payments Use Cases Task Force/scribe:Ian/ 15:48:02 rrsagent, draft minutes 15:48:02 I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2015/04/23-wpay-minutes.html manu 16:56:56 zakim, room for 4 for 75 minutes? 16:56:57 ok, manu; conference Team_(wpay)16:56Z scheduled with code 9729 (WPAY) for 75 minutes until 1811Z 17:00:30 Team_(wpay)16:56Z has now started 17:00:37 +Davd_Ezell 17:00:40 dezell: will be there in a second - on phone w/ Ian 17:01:44 +manu 17:49:04 -manu 17:49:11 -Davd_Ezell 17:49:12 Team_(wpay)16:56Z has ended 17:49:12 Attendees were Davd_Ezell, manu 18:20:55 Karen has joined #wpay 20:36:09 Karen has joined #wpay 20:48:58 Karen_ has joined #wpay 21:41:54 chaals has joined #wpay