13:47:21 RRSAgent has joined #wpay 13:47:21 logging to http://www.w3.org/2015/06/04-wpay-irc 13:47:32 zakim, this will be wpay 13:47:32 I do not see a conference matching that name scheduled within the next hour, manu 13:47:36 zakim, this will be pay 13:47:36 I do not see a conference matching that name scheduled within the next hour, manu 13:47:47 zakim, this will be WP 13:47:47 I do not see a conference matching that name scheduled within the next hour, Ian 13:47:56 hmm we may have a zakim issue, Houston 13:47:58 zakim, room for 15 for 90 minutes? 13:48:00 sorry, manu; could not schedule an adhoc conference; no bridge connection 14:01:10 zakim, room for 15 for 90 minutes? 14:01:11 sorry, manu; could not schedule an adhoc conference; no bridge connection 14:01:16 zakim, bye 14:01:16 Zakim has left #wpay 14:01:19 Zakim has joined #wpay 14:01:22 zakim, room for 15 for 90 minutes? 14:01:23 sorry, manu; could not schedule an adhoc conference; no bridge connection 14:01:55 Maybe we should instead set up a call through webex? 14:02:08 Ian, is that feasible for an instant call? 14:02:34 zakim, code? 14:02:35 sorry, manu, I don't know what conference this is 14:03:07 ah, we can do a webex with my identity 14:03:39 Jackson has joined #wpay 14:03:42 zakim, this is 9729 14:03:42 ok, dsr; that matches T&S_WEBPYMT(WPAY_USE)10:00AM 14:03:50 zakim, code? 14:03:50 the conference code is 9729 (tel:+1.617.761.6200 sip:zakim@voip.w3.org), manu 14:03:51 zakim, call Ian-Office 14:03:52 ok, Ian; the call is being made 14:03:52 +Ian 14:03:53 +Dsr 14:04:07 + +1.614.560.aabb 14:04:10 +??P21 14:04:14 zakim, who's here? 14:04:14 On the phone I see +1.540.887.aaaa, Ian, Dsr, +1.614.560.aabb, ??P21 14:04:16 On IRC I see Jackson, Zakim, RRSAgent, dezell, collier_matthew, Karen, dsr, AdrianHB, schuki, Erik, Ian, wseltzer, trackbot, manu 14:04:19 zakim, ??P21 is me 14:04:19 +AdrianHB; got it 14:04:25 zakim, aabb is David_Jackson 14:04:25 +David_Jackson; got it 14:04:29 +[IPcaller] 14:04:39 zakim, aaaa is Matthew_Collier 14:04:39 +Matthew_Collier; got it 14:04:41 + +44.203.289.aacc 14:05:03 zakim, aacc is Natasha 14:05:03 +Natasha; got it 14:05:04 zakim, [IPcaller] is me 14:05:05 +manu; got it 14:05:11 zakim, who is on the call? 14:05:11 +[IPcaller] 14:05:11 On the phone I see Matthew_Collier, Ian, Dsr, David_Jackson, AdrianHB, manu, Natasha, [IPcaller] 14:05:22 Zakim: aacc is schuki 14:05:23 zakim, [IPcaller] is manu 14:05:23 +manu; got it 14:05:26 zakim, who is on the call? 14:05:26 On the phone I see Matthew_Collier, Ian, Dsr, David_Jackson, AdrianHB, manu, Natasha, manu.a 14:05:38 not following w3c rules for irc names 14:06:29 Agenda: https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-webpayments-ig/2015Jun/0010.html 14:06:34 scribe: Ian 14:07:43 Ian: I would happily give a quick update on what I've been working on - would like to convey my perception of things. 14:07:54 Adrian: Do we want to mention Thursday night drinks on the call? 14:07:58 Ian: I may have missed that. 14:08:08 Ian: Is there a finalized plan? 14:08:21 Adrian: Yes, there is a pending email that I need to send you. 14:08:27 https://www.w3.org/Payments/IG/wiki/Main_Page/FTF_June2015 14:08:31 Topic: Face to Face updates 14:08:45 Where: Le Cirque Cafe, One Beacon Court, 151 East 58th Street (in the same building as Bloomberg) 14:08:45 When: Thursday, June 18 14:08:56 Ian: The primary goal is that we end up with W3C Charters that we feel that we have a consensus for - W3C standards work for the fall 2015. 14:08:59 What: .... 14:09:04 https://docs.google.com/document/d/1FbHscEFUA1P6Frm9h-98bgBF8oCNNu3_0BZh8l7Aa0c/edit 14:09:13 Ian: We're coming together around Payment Architecture - the thing that's most informing that is capabilities document 14:09:20 https://www.w3.org/Payments/IG/wiki/Roadmap/PaymentArchitectureWG 14:09:46 Ian: There is a draft charter for a Web Payments architecture group - it's sitting there lonely, ultimately it'll say that it'll do capabilities that are version 1 in capabilities document 14:10:02 q+ to discuss the payments vs commerce discussion that has been raised in the mailing lists wrt WGs 14:10:12 Ian: What are relevant tendencies for groups, what do deliverables look like - 2nd topic has come to the fore - which is around credentials. 14:10:36 Ian: My personal view is that we have more work to do to reach a shared agreement on the credentials use cases that we believe W3C should pursue. Manu has put into place a draft presentation that is here... 14:10:40 https://www.w3.org/Payments/IG/wiki/Main_Page/FTF_June2015/Credentials 14:10:47 Ian: We're going to be working on that to bring the group up to speed. 14:11:10 Ian: We would like to hear from the group on where the most important financial industry use cases are - digital signatures, etc. needs for standardization. 14:11:26 Ian: If we can do that, we won't have a charter at the end of the meeting, but we'll have a better sense of where we think we can make a difference. 14:11:41 Ian: Then we'll have a discussion w/ folks that have been working on credentials on education and healthcare. 14:11:55 Ian: There are other security/authentication things that need to happen elsewhere at W3C. 14:12:18 Ian: Any requirements we can develop over the summer - Adrian will be focused on talking about Value Web - 3rd possible area - greater shared understanding. 14:12:40 Ian: Stuff that needs to happen is development of capabilities and then getting to a better understanding of what we mean by "Credentials" and use cases. 14:12:47 https://www.w3.org/Payments/IG/wiki/Main_Page/FTF_June2015/Deployment 14:12:54 Ian: Manu also included a topic on successful deployment. 14:13:14 Ian: How do we get uptake, how do we support pilot projects, what are versioning issues - how do we get it to "work in practice" 14:13:21 ChaoDuan has joined #wpay 14:13:38 Ian: I'm also working on Jeff Jaffe (W3C CEO)'s presentation. We're up to 62 people - we're at standing room only for the roundtable. 14:14:02 Ian: Since we have big names in the group - we have to put on a good presentation. So, that's how I see the world from my point of view. 14:14:07 q+ to ask about presentation on 18th. 14:14:25 ack adrian 14:14:25 AdrianHB, you wanted to discuss the payments vs commerce discussion that has been raised in the mailing lists wrt WGs 14:14:30 Ian: We were hoping to have all these materials ready for people to review before the meeting. 14:14:35 Ian: There is stuff to review. 14:15:05 AdrianHB: I wanted to bring up something we got in review comments from X9 - the comment basically says something to the effect of "you're doing commerce, not just payments" 14:15:28 AdrianHB: Maybe that means we have a Commerce WG - and a Payments WG - specifics of actual payment - assuming all commerce stuff is done, how do we do the payment? 14:15:33 q? 14:15:36 ack manu 14:15:36 manu, you wanted to ask about presentation on 18th. 14:15:39 +1 to this point 14:15:52 Manu:To quickly respond to Adrian, -1 to prematurely splitting 14:15:58 ...groups; in time that may happen 14:16:12 ...but keep in mind that there are groups working on 10-15 (or more) specs and they have been able to make progress 14:16:25 ...I think things will be so tightly coupled in v1, that creating multiple WGs will create unnecessary overheard. 14:16:26 q? 14:16:30 s/overheard/overhead 14:16:46 q+ 14:16:54 ChaoDuan_ has joined #wpay 14:17:01 manu: Thanks Ian for the summary with where we are re: face-to-face 14:17:12 ...can you give update on roundtable and presentations from IG 14:17:27 q+ to respond to Manu 14:18:05 Ian: We had originally thought for the roundtable - interest group will work for 2.5 days - converge on what it believes needs to be done. First part of roundtable - sharing w/ other 30+ organizations what we think needs to happen. The second part will be to hear from them if they think this is the right direction. 14:18:26 Ian: The way we structured the roundtable - Jeff will do 20 minute talk about W3C, Web, and Payments Activity - and direction for work. 14:18:41 Ian: I'd like to seed discussion with questions from the IG - "we don't know the answer to that, get roundtable to tell us" 14:19:00 Ian: People in audience may have their own questions - Jeff was going to field questions originally. Now it's morphed into a panel. 14:19:04 Ian: I will moderate 14:19:14 Ian: There will be questions from the audience, I'll try to direct them to the panel. 14:19:59 Ian: I've extended 5 invitations, heard back from 3 people - trying to create a bit of diversity - Erik from Bloomberg, Claudia for US Fed, Evert from Rabobank, and two other outstanding invitations. 14:20:19 Ian: We're seeking some diversity. I also plan to call on IG participants who are in the room where I think those people are the right people to call on. 14:20:49 Ian: There are a lot of people in the IG - didn't want to discriminate - but wanted to have people there supporting Jeff. Mostly just introductions, saying a few things from an industry stakeholder perspective. 14:21:02 q? 14:21:04 + +1.312.322.aadd 14:21:07 ack Jackson 14:21:21 zakim, aadd is padler 14:21:21 +padler; got it 14:21:25 padler has joined #wpay 14:21:41 zakim, who is on the call? 14:21:41 On the phone I see Matthew_Collier, Ian, Dsr, David_Jackson, AdrianHB, manu, Natasha, manu.a, padler 14:22:00 Jackson: One problem I think we can help with...historically we have made a separation between payments and the collection of data that becomes the payment 14:22:08 ...we are doing it in this conversation as well 14:22:14 ...but the market has moved past that. 14:22:26 +1 to what David Jackson is saying! 14:22:38 ...the banks and processors still view the world that way, but are being circumvented by those that do not observe that convention 14:22:44 ...e.g., around loyalty schemes 14:22:46 ...these things are merging into the process 14:22:50 q? 14:23:03 ack AdrianHB 14:23:03 AdrianHB, you wanted to respond to Manu 14:23:07 Jackson:...so not as bright a line as we might like it to be 14:23:46 AdrianHB: I appreciate the operational challenge of multiple groups, but not sure we want one group to do all the things (other than credentials) 14:23:58 ...I think the commerce v. payments is a useful way to distinguish functionality 14:23:58 q+ to say he's hearing David and Adrian saying two different things? 14:24:04 ack manu 14:24:04 manu, you wanted to say he's hearing David and Adrian saying two different things? 14:24:09 Manu: Yes, let's discuss at FTF 14:24:54 q? 14:25:17 Jackson: What i'm trying to say is that where we separate commerce/payment...at the 50K view, we need to embrace these topics that we might think of as commerce (loyalty, receipts, etc.).....is one thing 14:25:24 ...operationally I don't have a particular view 14:25:34 ...I am ok with different approaches operationally 14:26:00 ...but we don't want to be so focused on the payments process that the applied standard does not end up doing enough to add value. 14:26:03 Manu: +1 to David 14:26:07 q+ to ask for a little clarification and also to share some thoughts on loose coupling of core concepts.. 14:26:22 Manu: So there are a couple of points being made: 14:26:33 * How widely should we cast a net? I am hearing we should take a more holistic view 14:26:56 * What's the most efficient way to organize the work operationally? (e.g., not taking on too much per group so they can make progress) 14:27:08 ack padler 14:27:11 padler, you wanted to ask for a little clarification and also to share some thoughts on loose coupling of core concepts.. 14:27:16 zakim, who is on the call? 14:27:16 On the phone I see Matthew_Collier, Ian, Dsr, David_Jackson, AdrianHB, manu, Natasha, manu.a, padler 14:28:50 padler: You need at the base identity to allow different processes to work together (e.g., tie together payments and loyalty, ....) 14:29:10 ...the feedback we got from X9 about segmentation of the payment process...if you think about it...there are core areas of focus: 14:29:12 - identification 14:29:32 - composability into different flows and still getting interop 14:29:50 ...e.g., developing credentials that are interoperable across industry use cases 14:30:16 ...so in work on capabilities I have been thinking about some aspects being more about commerce (e.g., "this is a loyal customer") 14:31:44 padler: My question is: as we are talking about commerce and breaking down the work, and whether we are focused on payments or something border, it feels like there are capabilities beyond what we expect in just a payment agent. 14:31:53 ...e.g., identity stuff does not belong in "just payment agent" 14:32:11 ...so I've been wondering how to depict: 14:32:30 q+ to wrap up and move on to next agenda item (Capabilities) 14:32:32 * interoperable identifiers 14:32:42 * services around providing assertions around identifiers 14:32:44 q+ to suggest that common capabilities is a good reason for payments WG and commerce WG to collaborate but not be the same thing 14:32:49 * services around identity and identity metadata 14:33:41 * services around payments and contracts and value transfer 14:34:22 ...and some of those use cases are mostly about exchange of value and less about identity of person 14:34:38 * services more about commerce like loyalty 14:35:04 padler: It's important that we tease those out so that different components can be used in or out of a payments context 14:35:06 q? 14:35:08 ack manu 14:35:08 manu, you wanted to wrap up and move on to next agenda item (Capabilities) 14:35:11 padler has joined #wpay 14:35:15 q? 14:35:39 ack AdrianHB 14:35:39 AdrianHB, you wanted to suggest that common capabilities is a good reason for payments WG and commerce WG to collaborate but not be the same thing 14:35:59 q? 14:36:04 AdrianHB: I want to suggest based on Pat's input that it feels a bit like there are common capabilities between commerce and payments 14:36:15 ...that's a good reason for 2 WGs to work on those domains to collaborate 14:36:57 Topic: Capabilities Document 14:37:03 https://docs.google.com/document/d/1FbHscEFUA1P6Frm9h-98bgBF8oCNNu3_0BZh8l7Aa0c/edit 14:37:11 commerce and payments have some common capability requirements (identity as an example) so it makes sense that the two would collaborate in standardisation work but have specific focus 14:37:45 padler: I've been working to simplify the document and also tease apart things from use cases ... also take into account X9 feedback 14:38:04 see, for example, page 4 14:38:13 Core capability includes "key management" 14:38:30 ....if we can't do that it will be difficult to do asynchronous things 14:38:44 ...then there's a whole section on identification and authorization 14:38:59 ...that talks about registration, identification, credentials, binding 14:39:25 ...also sections on offers and invoices 14:39:35 +Davd_Ezell 14:39:44 ...offers may not be specific to payments 14:39:45 zakim, Davd is me 14:39:45 +dezell; got it 14:39:51 ...contracts and so forth might appear there 14:39:55 ...sections are starting to emerging 14:40:13 ...perhaps a good topic for the capabilities session of FTF is how do we tease apart commerce from payments 14:40:13 q+ 14:40:29 ack me 14:40:29 q+ to think that we could bikeshed for a long time on "teasing things apart" 14:41:24 Ian: For the face-to-face meeting, I'm concerned if we spend a lot of time talking about how to operationally manage the work. Our goal is to come out with charters - my sense given actual resource limitations w/ team contacts / limitations - it will not be practical for us to launch a commerce and payments group. 14:41:36 Ian: it's one thing to understand the topics conceptually, operations is something else. 14:42:02 q+ to say this is more about the orthogonality of standards vs. the structure of the group.. 14:42:20 Ian: We could have discussions - how thinking about things helps us come up with architecture to work with stuff - but I'll offer that we won't have the resources to launch two pretty closely related groups. Launching one that can evolve and fork as needed (if there is a perception that doing so would help work get done faster), then that's good. 14:42:37 Ian: I think there are a number of considerations around resources - see where we are once the group gains momentum. 14:42:39 ack manu 14:42:39 manu, you wanted to think that we could bikeshed for a long time on "teasing things apart" 14:43:25 Manu: I was mostly going to say what Ian just said...it's important that we understand how the pieces make sense logically and how they compose, but I think there are resource constraints making 2 groups less likely to succeed. Also coordination overhead is real. 14:44:08 ...I think we could spend a lot of time conceptualizing..i think we should instead focus on the 'minimum viable product' since we will get to technical work faster 14:44:23 q? 14:44:29 +1 to a single WG (I bow to Manu and Ian's W3C experience) but still think this is a good separation of concerns that we should use 14:44:34 ack padler 14:44:34 padler, you wanted to say this is more about the orthogonality of standards vs. the structure of the group.. 14:45:31 padler: Primary conversation for the FTF meeting goal is to understand the organization of capabilities and to understand why things are separated 14:45:50 @Ian: I think the stakeholders for each are different so I'd expect it to be useful to them 14:46:40 Payments: banks, central banks, third party payment providers 14:47:05 Commerce: Retailers, Loyalty Program Providers etc 14:47:20 q+ to ask why you don't think there is enough of a logical separation in the capabilities document now? 14:47:23 padler: Important for us to recognize that capabilities extend beyond payment agent 14:47:24 Identity: EVERYBODY :) 14:47:29 q? 14:47:31 ack manu 14:47:31 manu, you wanted to ask why you don't think there is enough of a logical separation in the capabilities document now? 14:47:32 ack manu 14:48:22 AdrianHB: I don't think a lot more to do...I like the current organization 14:48:26 ...I think we have 3 categories: 14:48:28 IDENTITY 14:48:29 PAYMENTS 14:48:30 COMMERCE 14:48:36 ...and offers, receipts, invoices fit in commerce 14:48:39 (and loyalty) 14:48:40 +1... 14:48:44 q+ to agree 14:48:50 the only thing I would add is key mgmt 14:48:56 q? 14:49:00 ack manu 14:49:00 manu, you wanted to agree 14:49:37 Ian: For the purposes of the face-to-face meeting, given initial support - if that's a direction people think would be useful for organizing it, people may find it useful. 14:49:57 q+ 14:49:58 Ian: Under each category, there may be subcategories. 14:50:22 Ian: This will also give me a framework for Jeff for his presentation - we can talk about priorities under each one. 14:50:28 IJ: What about security as a top-level topic? 14:50:35 padler: I like Adrian's 3 14:50:44 ..that's how it's starting to flow 14:50:48 +1 to security 14:50:57 ...but also "key management" is a supporting feature for all three of the top categories 14:50:57 (with key management in there) 14:51:15 I think we need keys/signatures/encryption/authentication 14:51:20 +1 to key management under security 14:51:32 but we should also mention signatures, encryption, and authentication. 14:51:53 maybe we do: Identity, Security and Privacy, Payments, Commerce 14:51:57 and they build on each other 14:52:00 q+ to ask Pat what he thinks needs to be done to Capabilities before face-to-face. 14:52:00 perhaps security is the wrong title but +1 14:52:12 ack padler 14:52:48 ack manu 14:52:48 manu, you wanted to ask Pat what he thinks needs to be done to Capabilities before face-to-face. 14:52:51 (Sounds like good input to Pat for updates) 14:54:52 q+ to see if the group has any other concerns before the call tomorrow. 14:55:37 ack manu 14:55:37 manu, you wanted to see if the group has any other concerns before the call tomorrow. 14:55:58 topic; Summarizing who is doing what for next week 14:56:12 - Pat, Manu, Adrian, Ian to work on capabilities 14:56:24 - Ian and Manu working on credentials topic preparation 14:56:29 - Ian working on Jeff presentation 14:56:47 - Ian also working on payment architecture charter...could use help on dependencies, deliverables 14:57:13 [Other people are working on other presentations as shown in the FTF meeting agenda] 14:57:43 Karen has joined #wpay 14:58:27 Ian: Need to focus on items above - expand the number of contributors that doesn't augment the costs that much. 14:58:29 q? 14:58:37 Ian: People may want to volunteer to help - in a section or two. 14:58:44 q+ to make small suggestion on charters.. 14:58:49 Ian: People may want to fill in each section given template. 14:58:54 ack padler 14:58:54 padler, you wanted to make small suggestion on charters.. 14:59:30 We may want to call it the "Web Payments WG"! :P 14:59:52 +1 to pat but can't think of better name than payments :) 14:59:56 -David_Jackson 14:59:58 -Ian 15:00:10 -manu 15:00:11 -padler 15:00:13 -Natasha 15:00:15 -Dsr 15:00:16 -AdrianHB 15:00:17 -Matthew_Collier 15:00:20 voip: connections? 15:00:22 -manu.a 15:00:23 -dezell 15:00:23 T&S_WEBPYMT(WPAY_USE)10:00AM has ended 15:00:23 Attendees were +1.540.887.aaaa, Ian, Dsr, +1.614.560.aabb, AdrianHB, David_Jackson, Matthew_Collier, +44.203.289.aacc, Natasha, manu, +1.312.322.aadd, padler, Davd_Ezell, dezell 15:00:34 s/voip: connections?// 15:02:13 rrsagent, draft minutes 15:02:13 I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2015/06/04-wpay-minutes.html manu 15:02:21 rrsagent, make logs public 15:02:24 rrsagent, draft minutes 15:02:24 I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2015/06/04-wpay-minutes.html manu 15:03:48 Meeting: Web Payments Payment Architecture Task Force (Thursday) 15:03:50 Chair: manu 15:04:55 Present: Ian, Manu, Pat, DavidJackson, Natasha, DaveRaggett, Adrian, MatthewCollier, ChaoDuan, DavidEzell 15:06:11 rrsagent, draft minutes 15:06:11 I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2015/06/04-wpay-minutes.html manu 15:06:24 s/hmm we may have a zakim issue, Houston/scribe: manu/ 15:06:32 s/Maybe we should instead set up a call through webex?// 15:06:42 s/Ian, is that feasible for an instant call?// 15:06:55 s/not following w3c rules for irc names// 15:07:06 s/scribe: Ian// 15:07:43 rrsagent, draft minutes 15:07:43 I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2015/06/04-wpay-minutes.html manu 15:17:35 padler has joined #wpay 15:31:31 padler has joined #wpay 16:19:16 Karen has joined #wpay 17:19:40 Zakim has left #wpay 18:59:43 github-bot has joined #wpay 18:59:43 [13webpayments-ig] 15dprophet pushed 1 new commit to 06master: 02https://github.com/w3c/webpayments-ig/commit/f610ba4caa290df8b42ec330fba8f1d45209480a 18:59:43 13webpayments-ig/06master 14f610ba4 15Erik Anderson: Update requirements_draft.txt 18:59:44 github-bot has left #wpay 19:29:09 padler has joined #wpay 19:44:25 Karen has joined #wpay 23:20:38 Karen has joined #wpay