11:59:16 RRSAgent has joined #wpay 11:59:16 logging to http://www.w3.org/2015/06/16-wpay-irc 11:59:20 Zakim has joined #wpay 12:03:23 Karen has joined #wpay 12:19:26 mountie has joined #wpay 12:26:29 trackbot, prepare meeting 12:26:31 RRSAgent, make logs 413 12:26:33 Zakim, this will be 12:26:33 I don't understand 'this will be', trackbot 12:26:34 Meeting: Web Payments Interest Group Teleconference 12:26:34 Date: 16 June 2015 12:26:40 rrsagent, this meeting spans midnight 12:26:55 Meeting: Web Payments Interest Group FTF, Day 1 12:28:44 m4nu_ has joined #wpay 12:29:36 rrsagent, bye 12:29:46 rrsagent, make minutes member 12:29:46 I'm logging. I don't understand 'make minutes member', manu`. Try /msg RRSAgent help 12:29:52 rrsagent, set log member 12:29:57 rrsagent, bye 12:29:57 I see no action items 12:32:04 RRSAgent has joined #wpay 12:32:04 logging to http://www.w3.org/2015/06/16-wpay-irc 12:32:14 evanschwartz has joined #wpay 12:32:28 rrsagent, make logs member 12:32:32 rrsagent, draft minutes 12:32:32 I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2015/06/16-wpay-minutes.html manu` 12:32:57 nick has joined #wpay 12:33:11 evert has joined #wpay 12:33:13 Meeting: Web Payments IG: 2015 NYC Face to Face 12:33:17 rrsagent, draft minutes 12:33:17 I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2015/06/16-wpay-minutes.html manu` 12:33:38 Ryladog has joined #wpay 12:33:56 dsr has joined #wpay 12:34:06 Topic: Introductions 12:34:07 Meeting: Web Payments IG: 2015 NYC Face to Face - Day 1 12:34:13 dezell: Welcome! 12:34:33 vishshastry has joined #wpay 12:34:51 ... intros: Name, company, 3 words 12:35:02 dezell: David Ezell, NACS, co-chair 12:35:17 Yaso: Yaso @@, NIC.br 12:35:27 dsr: Dave Raggett, W3C 12:35:45 mountie: Mountie Lee, Paygate Korea 12:36:01 s/@@/Cordova/ 12:36:16 Same Winig, Apple 12:36:23 Evert Fekkes, Rabobank 12:36:29 @@, Apple 12:36:33 David Baron, Mozilla, 12:36:42 @@@@@ 12:36:49 GS1 12:36:53 Katie Haritos-Shea 12:36:58 @@ 12:37:00 Target 12:37:05 Pat Adler, US Fed 12:37:12 CIP Brazil 12:37:13 @@ 12:37:18 Jean-Yves Rossi 12:37:20 FED 12:37:39 Present+ ManuSporny 12:37:39 Zach Koch, Google Chrome 12:37:43 Present+ Dave_Raggett 12:37:48 Nick Shearer, Apple 12:37:52 @@ 12:37:55 Wendy Seltzer, W3C 12:37:56 Present+ NickShearer 12:37:56 +evert 12:37:59 Vish Shastry, Visa 12:38:07 Mark Tiggas, Wells Fargo 12:38:10 +Adrian Hope-Bailie, Ripple Labs 12:38:10 Present+ weinig 12:38:13 Present+ Katie_Haritos-Shea 12:38:14 Present+ ZachKoch 12:38:17 Erik Anderson, Bloomberg, co-chair 12:38:33 Present+ ErikAnderson 12:39:01 dezell: overview 12:39:18 ... As I see it, we're on a parallel track with other work 12:39:35 Kristy has joined #wpay 12:39:46 ... US Fed Faster Payments; ISO 12812 12:39:51 ... they're trying to eat the elephant 12:40:05 ... our group is focused on the Web, interconnectivity, the open web platform, browser 12:40:30 ... Agenda is front-loaded 12:40:51 ... we'll have breathing space over the next 2 days to come back 12:41:14 ... Main goal: steering committee is repsonsible for identifying external work that can be reused 12:41:21 ... and new work that needs to be started 12:41:35 ... We're in good position to start that hard work of starting new activities 12:41:47 msporny__ has joined #wpay 12:41:55 ... We have to grow the activity as we plan it. 12:42:21 ... With the wider group, assure that those are still good goals. 12:42:36 ... Standardization, we have a mental check-list of what we're thinking now. 12:43:27 ... Our sessions are short, so please keep your comments brief. 12:43:35 ... Pay attention to the time. 12:44:03 erik: We also have breakout rooms. 12:44:24 dezell: Hot topic sessions and secondary standards topics. We'll keep a running list 12:44:37 Arjun has joined #wpay 12:44:45 ... If you see a session that deserves a "hot topics" session, let me know, and I'll add it to the list. 12:44:46 Arjun_ has joined #wpay 12:45:17 Arjun has joined #wpay 12:45:21 Erik has joined #wpay 12:45:27 agenda: https://www.w3.org/Payments/IG/wiki/Main_Page/FTF_June2015 12:45:54 dezell: scribing: we take minutes in IRC. Please volunteer. 12:45:58 sgarnepudi has joined #wpay 12:46:27 anarkat has joined #wpay 12:46:49 nicktr has joined #wpay 12:46:53 https://www.w3.org/Payments/IG/wiki/Payment_Agent_Task_Force/Vision 12:47:03 ^^^ That's the document that we need consensus on 12:47:03 dezell: Vision statement under call for consensus 12:47:15 ... we're looking for all members of the IG to review, either comment or say you're ok with it. 12:47:27 ... we're looking to finalize that. 12:47:38 dezell: [reviews agenda for the day] 12:48:00 Call for consensus for vision document: https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-webpayments-ig/2015May/0220.html 12:48:05 ... Capabilities [Pat] 12:48:12 ... Use Cases [Manu] 12:48:16 stefan_thomas has joined #wpay 12:48:22 ... Browser [Zach] 12:48:31 ... [Lunch] 12:48:37 ... Security [Laurent] 12:48:55 ... Identity/Credentials [Manu] 12:49:05 adamm has joined #wpay 12:49:35 ... Settlement [Adrian] 12:49:40 ... Glossary [Evert] 12:49:50 Magda has joined #wpay 12:50:51 Topic: Capabilities for Payments 12:51:05 vishshastry has joined #wpay 12:51:08 https://www.w3.org/Payments/IG/wiki/Main_Page/FTF_June2015/Capabilities 12:51:31 https://www.w3.org/Payments/IG/wiki/Main_Page/FTF_June2015/Capabilities 12:51:50 q? 12:51:56 Zakim has joined #wpay 12:51:58 q? 12:52:04 rrsagent, draft minutes 12:52:04 I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2015/06/16-wpay-minutes.html wseltzer 12:52:26 chair: David_Ezell, Erik_Anderson 12:52:31 sgarnepu_ has joined #wpay 12:52:42 Leandro has joined #wpay 12:52:51 padler: lots of good content in roadmap, architecture 12:53:03 ... focused on breaking down the work, fitting it with other topics 12:53:27 ... Wiki outlines organization, capabilities, payment interactions 12:53:31 jyrossi has joined #wpay 12:53:46 q+ to ask that wiki is displayed at front of the room. 12:53:58 -> https://www.w3.org/Payments/IG/wiki/Main_Page/FTF_June2015/Capabilities#Web_Payments_Capabilities:_Where_are_we_now.3F Web Payments Capabilities: Where are we now? 12:54:04 Kristy has joined #wpay 12:54:11 padler: 5 groups of capabilities 12:54:18 q+ 12:54:40 Core and Security - Includes: Key Creation and Management, Cryptographic Signatures, Encryption Identity and Credentials - Includes: Identity, Credentials, Rights, Authentication, Authorization, Privacy, Discovery, Registration, Enrollment, and Legal/Regulatory concerns Accounts and Settlement - Includes: Accounts, Ledgers, and Legal/Regulatory concerns related to accounting and recorded ownership. 12:54:46 Payments and Exchange - Includes: Payment, Messaging, Clearing, Markets, Foreign/Currency Exchange, and Legal/regulatory concerns specific to Payments and Exchange of Value. Commerce - Includes: Offers, Invoicing, Receipts, Loyalty, Rewards, Contracts, Lending, Insurance, Taxation, Legal/Regulatory concerns related to aspects of commercial and economic interactions 12:54:46 https://www.w3.org/Payments/IG/wiki/Roadmap/PaymentArchitectureWG 12:54:48 CyrilV has joined #wpay 12:54:51 padler: broken down that way because of interactions 12:54:56 AdrianHB has joined #wpay 12:55:06 ... e.g. person walks into a store 12:55:33 @@: question of scope: why start with pre-payment? 12:55:53 padler: loyalty, stored value, identity -- things a payment needs to interact with 12:56:05 ... difficult to describe a payment without also talking about those 12:56:18 ... we're not trying to do all those things here, but to point to them where they're happinging 12:56:19 q+ to talk about where roadmap fits into capabilities. 12:56:26 s/happinging/happening/ 12:56:33 ... we want to plug into work elsewhere 12:56:42 @@: that ends up being very hard 12:56:54 ... assuming that some other group's work is going to solve a problem. 12:57:17 @@ = weinig 12:57:25 padler: other standards WG is looking into that 12:57:32 s/@@:/weinig:/ 12:58:14 q? 12:58:17 schutzer: you should accommodate those developments elsewhere 12:58:24 q? 12:58:26 q+ 12:58:28 sgarnepu_ has left #wpay 12:58:28 q+ 12:58:30 ack m4nu 12:58:31 sgarnepu_ has joined #wpay 12:58:31 m4nu, you wanted to ask that wiki is displayed at front of the room. and to talk about where roadmap fits into capabilities. 12:59:06 m4nu: capabilities doc is trying to help us understand the ecosystem 12:59:25 ... roadmap asks what is the highest priority, smallest scope that we can attack 13:00:05 ack m4nu 13:00:08 ack Ryladog 13:00:08 q? 13:01:00 Ryladog: where do regulatory requirements fit? 13:01:18 padler: we've put it into buckets 13:01:22 q? 13:01:33 ack nick 13:01:51 join nicktr_priv 13:02:09 nick: describing things that seem far from payments 13:02:27 padler: looking at the big picture, to say some things are out of scope 13:02:48 ... start to show the connections, eg. identity, in the web ecosystem 13:03:01 ... we can't define it just for payments, or conflict with work of another group 13:03:11 ... so we have other elements in to define the boundaries 13:03:12 q+ 13:03:13 q? 13:03:17 q? 13:03:24 q+ dezell 13:03:24 ack dbaron 13:04:09 jeff has joined #wpay 13:04:13 dbaron: danger, e.g. from XForms, referencing other things in development, 13:04:22 ... ended up with a piece of tech so large that no one wanted to implement 13:04:32 ... they ref'd things they were the only ones referencing 13:04:38 ... too big for the browsers to build 13:04:49 q+ 13:04:57 ... when you're looking at what other work is going on, look at who's involved with it 13:05:04 ... will it be an additional burden to implementers? 13:05:15 jheuer has joined #wpay 13:05:15 padler: true. just because there are other stndards doesn't mean they're being used 13:05:20 ... or implemented 13:05:29 ... that's the job of the external reviews TF 13:05:38 q? 13:05:54 ... to help examine whether the work is useful, implementable 13:06:18 AdrianHB: question, what should be in/out of scope? 13:06:20 ack AdrianHB 13:06:22 ack Ad 13:06:42 ... we tried to separate capability areas to set scope 13:07:04 ... looking at standards that exist, not just in development 13:07:11 ... are they applicable to what we're tryng to do 13:07:21 ... do they fit in the open web platform? 13:07:21 q? 13:07:28 ack dezell 13:07:35 dezell: heading toward prioritization 13:07:49 q+ to move through the rest of the presentation - time check 13:07:56 ... we've cast a broad net 13:08:07 ... work that needs to be done to tell the complete story 13:08:25 ... not that we need to do it all, but it needs to be done someplace for our work to make sense 13:08:47 ... we need to be crisper 13:09:16 Kristy has joined #wpay 13:09:17 ... also respond to noise outside that wants us to focus on other things 13:09:20 ack c 13:09:49 CyrilV: credential is an attribute of payment 13:10:04 ... so if we need it for payment, it shoudl be in-scope 13:10:49 s/shoudl/should/ 13:11:12 q+ 13:11:30 ... payment credential distinct from ID, government credentials 13:12:01 ack m 13:12:01 m4nu, you wanted to move through the rest of the presentation - time check 13:12:24 q+ 13:12:42 q- jheuer 13:13:32 padler: we're working on prioritization 13:13:36 ... coordination with other work 13:13:59 ... identifying interfaces 13:14:27 ... when we describe process as series of steps, it can become harder to see some of the interactions 13:14:35 ... e.g. bi-directional communications 13:15:06 ... so with the wheel, try to show the participants, interactions 13:15:09 q+ 13:15:26 -> https://www.w3.org/Payments/IG/wiki/Main_Page/FTF_June2015/Capabilities#Payments_interactions wheel diagram 13:15:43 padler: wheel allows us to be granular about the interactions and parties 13:16:50 screen has joined #wpay 13:16:51 q? 13:16:52 yaso1 has joined #wpay 13:17:13 Kristy has joined #wpay 13:17:17 padler: focus on who's going to do the work, iterative development of the work 13:17:30 weinig: you said the payments space, the commerce space. How do you differentiate? 13:18:11 padler: commerce deals with things like loyalty, receipts, invoices 13:18:13 mtiggas has joined #wpay 13:18:15 dezell2 has joined #wpay 13:18:20 ... as oppsed to payment, which is movement of currency 13:18:22 q? 13:18:29 weinig: how do you see payments integrating with the web? 13:19:02 padler: customer returning to the store, you want to offer a loyalty bonus, that's commerce 13:19:17 ... when they want to initiate the payment, that's "payment" 13:19:29 ... so differentiate accounts, payments, commerce 13:19:53 q+ 13:19:56 q+ 13:19:59 ... each of those has a different dynamic 13:20:11 ... regulatory 13:20:26 ack mountie 13:20:26 q? 13:20:47 mountie: are you describing web, user-agent, or user? 13:21:19 padler: interactions (examples) are taking place over the web 13:21:28 q? 13:22:16 ... user is a difficult word, because it might be a person, might be an autonomous agent, corporate actor 13:22:17 q+ to note roles - and that UA won't be implementing most of this stuff - it'll happen at a higher level. 13:22:28 ack next 13:23:00 Ryladog: for accessibility purposes, note that the text in the lower sectors can't be seen 13:23:19 q+ 13:23:34 jheuer: group has different views of "user" 13:24:03 ... patterns in common? 13:25:09 padler: goal in the diagram is to focus on the patterns of interaction 13:25:15 ... whether it's individuals or institutions 13:25:27 q+ 13:26:09 ... focus on relationships 13:26:19 q? 13:26:22 ack jheuer 13:26:33 q- m4nu 13:27:19 ack CyrilV 13:27:37 CyrilV: Capabilities, suggest some change of terminology 13:27:41 ... accounts and @@ 13:27:46 s/@@/Ownership 13:27:48 s/@@/Ownership/ 13:27:55 ... "clearing and settlement" 13:28:11 ... "transfer of funds" rather than "payments" 13:28:36 +1 to Cyril 13:28:40 ... move "payments and exchange" to "clearing and settlement" 13:29:14 s/accounts and/instead of "accounts and settlement", "accounts and/ 13:29:30 AdrianHB: we'll talk about settlement later 13:29:40 ... settlement is when you finally move the money 13:29:55 ... ownership, I think fits into "commerce" 13:30:20 ... most of what we call payments today isn't settlement, it's clearinghouse 13:30:33 vishshastry has joined #wpay 13:31:01 CyrilV: managing accounts 13:31:07 q? 13:31:18 q+ to say we're out of time 13:33:12 q- 13:33:20 padler: do we have the right capability groups defined? 13:33:24 q+ 13:33:27 ... the right break-down? 13:33:29 q+ 13:33:46 nick: q about difference between payments and exchange. 13:34:22 ... payments can create legal and regulatory obligations, seems to blend with "commerce" 13:34:44 padler: look at the example 13:34:51 ... 3 steps 13:35:14 q+ to suggest a change to capabilities group 13:35:26 ack nick 13:35:28 aylcw3c has joined #wpay 13:36:09 ... if you take "payments" out of the bucket with "exchange" 13:36:19 q+ to mention that regulatory affects every role and every capability group. 13:36:54 nick: Payment implies commercial obligation 13:37:04 (in many jurisdictions ;) ) 13:37:20 ack Arjun 13:37:23 Q+ 13:37:47 Arjun: identity is a much-abused term 13:38:04 ... the ID you want is a subset to complete the transaction 13:38:48 padler: you need a specific set of info to facilitate transaction 13:38:56 q? 13:39:03 ... if there's work to standardize around identity, we'd like to plug that in 13:39:32 ... I shouldn't need a separate set of identity credentials for payments 13:41:07 +1 to Arjun 13:41:22 [more to discuss in an identity breakout] 13:42:13 wseltzer has changed the topic to: Web Payments FTF: https://www.w3.org/Payments/IG/wiki/Main_Page/FTF_June2015 13:42:30 padler: do we need to do more with terminology here? 13:42:40 ... proposal from cyril 13:42:54 ... id and credentials, accounts and ownership, clearing and settlmeent 13:43:06 erik: we're talking well beyond payments 13:44:10 q? 13:44:11 q+ 13:44:14 q+ to split payment in confirmation, availability of funds and settlement 13:44:45 schutzer: account management needs different info from clearing and settlement 13:44:50 ... e.g. number of items 13:45:32 ... different granularity 13:45:40 ack next 13:45:42 q? 13:46:45 Srikanth: what's the driving force behind having "commerce" here? 13:47:19 q+ 13:47:27 padler: we're trying to keep the aspects separate 13:47:57 q+ 13:50:24 AdrianHB: loyalty is a small piece of commerce; more invoices and receipts 13:50:43 i/Welcome!/scribenick: wseltzer 13:50:51 rrsagent, make minutes 13:50:51 I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2015/06/16-wpay-minutes.html wseltzer 13:50:53 q? 13:51:17 rrsagent, set logs public 13:52:36 Magda has joined #wpay 13:52:40 s/join nicktr_priv// 13:53:08 q? 13:53:17 padler: if you have additional suggestions, please share 13:54:07 q? 13:54:15 ack next 13:54:48 q+ jheuer 13:55:04 adamm: effects of standardization on innovation? 13:55:23 Srikanth has joined #wpay 13:55:27 ... e.g. receipts could have very different formats, purposes 13:56:01 ... transaction record, proof, 13:56:29 ... we could end up over-defining and not being very useful 13:57:01 ... Also re identity, our charter says "privacy" but I'm not sure what we mean 13:57:14 Kristy has joined #wpay 13:57:52 +1 on privacy 13:58:00 q- 13:58:02 ... you can pay $5 cash with no identity; coupling payment and identity too tightly undermines privacy 13:58:03 q- 13:58:03 [Adam, we envision a spectrum of payment scenarios and identity needs. We also, re receipts, largely agree and are looking for a very small set of terms on which we can standardize.] 13:58:21 dezell: we'll come back over the minutes looking for these points to return later 13:58:22 q? 13:58:24 q- 13:58:34 ack AdrianHB 13:58:34 AdrianHB, you wanted to suggest a change to capabilities group 13:58:56 AdrianHB: clearing and settlement; accounts and ownership as categories. 13:59:15 ... in the retail payments space, settlement is mostly separate 13:59:35 Adrian: Privacy and "tightly coupled" infringes on privacy 13:59:58 ... real-time settlement is a separate important topic 14:00:01 q+ 14:00:03 ack next 14:00:30 Arie: consider the ontology 14:01:01 ... clearing and settlement happen at the retail level, at the institution level; definitions are different. 14:01:16 ... paying for stock is different from paying for apples 14:01:42 ... lexicon should be democratic 14:01:56 Magda has joined #wpay 14:02:19 ... international 14:02:42 dezell: glossary coming later 14:02:43 ack next 14:03:35 CyrilV: commerce is buyer-seller issues 14:03:53 ... id/credentials are payer-payee 14:04:05 dezell2 has joined #wpay 14:04:05 ... which are not necssariliy the same 14:04:12 zakim, close the queu 14:04:12 I don't understand 'close the queu', dezell2 14:04:14 ... payment/settlement is funds manager 14:04:15 zakim, close the queue 14:04:15 ok, dezell2, the speaker queue is closed 14:04:48 ... the bank, not the account-holder 14:05:28 ack next 14:05:50 Arjun: commerce feels like a catch-all 14:06:08 ... isn't loyalty just another entry in a ledger 14:06:30 Magda has joined #wpay 14:06:38 q? 14:06:43 zakim, close the queue 14:06:43 ok, Ian, the speaker queue is closed 14:06:49 ack jheuer 14:07:06 jheuer: behind each sector in the circle are verticals 14:07:21 offline comment - in many cases a payment / funds guarantee (not necessarily true 'settlement' or movement of funds between account providers) is sufficient to conduct a transaction. clearing and settlement standards may want to take this into account. 14:08:21 ... prioritization decision should depend on where we can bring value, number of users 14:08:38 ack Kristy 14:09:03 Kristy: as we look for the core, keep in mind that there are lots of others working in this space 14:09:05 [Ian asks Kristy: What do you think should be "in"?] 14:09:11 ... so set reasonable expectations for them 14:09:25 Kristy: draw the line between whats in and out 14:09:35 ... if we're delivering in 2-3 years, consumer isn't thinking "online v offline" 14:09:39 ... but holistically. 14:09:45 q+ to Kristy 14:09:46 ... it's all converging 14:09:48 q- 14:09:54 +1 to Kristy 14:09:57 Kristy: things will look very similar in 3 yeras 14:10:10 ... talking about immediate transfer of funds, real-time settlement; whose view are we looking at. 14:11:13 dezell2: important next steps, Charters. 14:11:32 ... some of the work, like loyalty, is not in a charter, but a place-holder for thought 14:12:06 Dave just volunteered for next session 14:12:07 [break until 10:30] 14:12:14 nick has joined #wpay 14:12:21 padler: you're asking same questions we've been asking ourselves 14:12:22 +2 to kristy. ecom use cases often have merchants authorize a transaction and only settle / capture after they have shipped a good, which can occur after a significant legnth of time 14:12:45 ... how do we build a model that helps us move forward in loosely coupled, coordinated manner. 14:12:51 ... can we agree on a framework. 14:13:17 ... I'll make updates to the presentaiton page. If people have comments we haven't captured, please share 14:13:27 Ryladog: if you have comments you didn't get to make, add ot irc 14:15:17 anarkat has joined #wpay 14:25:36 dsr has joined #wpay 14:32:12 Magda has joined #wpay 14:32:23 mountie has joined #wpay 14:33:01 zkoch has joined #wpay 14:33:38 scribenick: dsr 14:34:03 Topic: Use case / capability prioritization (Manu Sporny) 14:34:30 presentation: https://www.w3.org/Payments/IG/wiki/Main_Page/FTF_June2015/UseCases 14:38:06 Magda has joined #wpay 14:38:10 nick has joined #wpay 14:38:23 evert has joined #wpay 14:38:51 AdrianHB has joined #wpay 14:39:26 David asks people about dinner plans tonight. Erik says 6:30pm at a nearby restaurant. 14:40:04 yaso has joined #wpay 14:40:16 Manu points to the wiki page for use cases (see above link) 14:40:34 evanschwartz has joined #wpay 14:40:40 weinig has joined #wpay 14:40:43 We need to map the goals listed at the statt of the page into concrete deliverables. 14:40:52 jyrossi has joined #wpay 14:41:18 -> https://www.w3.org/Payments/IG/wiki/Main_Page/FTF_June2015/UseCases Use cases presentation 14:41:26 adamm has joined #wpay 14:41:41 We looked through the use cases to identity which ones we want to support in version 1 of the web payment standards — loyalty and coupons were deferred to later versions. 14:41:59 Arjun has joined #wpay 14:42:08 zkoch has joined #wpay 14:42:18 Manu describes the minimal viable platform for version 1.0 14:42:21 Kristy has joined #wpay 14:43:03 We need to clarify over this F2F the position on credentials, and security 14:43:10 Erik has joined #wpay 14:43:21 From the wiki: igital signatures, encryption, multi-factor authentication 14:43:28 s/igital/digital/ 14:43:45 Many says we should make it very clear that multi-factor is not necessary for success in v1 14:43:52 q? 14:43:55 s/Many/Manu/ 14:43:58 zakim, open the queue 14:43:58 ok, dezell2, the speaker queue is open 14:44:20 The section”Review mapping of use cases to priorities” lists things that are at risk 14:44:37 (see https://www.w3.org/Payments/IG/wiki/Main_Page/FTF_June2015/UseCases) 14:45:36 Manu explains that credentials may be needed to establish that someone is legally entitled to purchase something, e.g. alcohol. 14:46:33 Invoices in v1 is intended to be very minimal, amount, currency, very brief line item 14:47:06 Ubiquitous schemes are things that are widely used today, e.g. credit cards 14:47:39 Discovery is about enabling a level playing field for payment service providers 14:48:09 We should enable good privacy for payers as a default 14:48:51 We are missing a use case around authentication based upon today’s user id and password 14:49:25 Multi-factor authentication is about biometrics, PIN entry, secret gestures etc. 14:49:52 Do we support both payer and payee initiated payments? 14:49:59 q+ to +1 both push/pull as important to the architecture. 14:50:08 Payer initiated payments is at risk for v1 14:50:12 q+ 14:50:26 q+ 14:51:08 Also at risk are delivery of physical goods, and electronic receipts. 14:51:18 ack de 14:51:18 dezell, you wanted to +1 both push/pull as important to the architecture. 14:51:43 q+ to ask about subscriptions as non-essential use cases 14:51:48 jheuer has joined #wpay 14:51:57 q+ 14:52:03 David: +1 to having both payer and payee initiated payments, as these are both realy important 14:52:15 ack nic 14:52:26 +1 to David 14:52:36 aylcw3c has joined #wpay 14:52:40 Nick: registration lists, I would very much like to see that, as it is very important to setting up an account 14:52:42 +1 to David 14:52:49 s/registration lists/registrationless/ 14:53:10 +1 on Push & Pull payments 14:53:10 q? 14:53:12 q+ 14:53:12 q+ 14:53:14 q+ to discuss payment elements 14:53:18 ack adamm 14:53:21 evanschwartz_ has joined #wpay 14:53:54 q+ to talk about the "small primitive" approach. 14:53:54 I also want to see biometric support for authentication in v1 so that we can move beyond passwords 14:53:55 Adam: are we assuming that there will be an end to end flow or are we talking about standards for small primitives? 14:53:56 Nick: Not having biometric authentication as a Version 1 use case is surprising. Standard doesn’t need to define how biometric works, but it should be a use case. We should look to the future for authentication, not the past (passwords). 14:54:00 Manu: primitives 14:54:02 Leandro has joined #wpay 14:54:03 ack z 14:54:03 zkoch, you wanted to ask about subscriptions as non-essential use cases 14:54:04 Nick: very good 14:54:07 thinks re: Nick's comments that we need to have payer authentication but we don't necessarily need to make that authentication biometric 14:54:08 q? 14:54:21 q? 14:54:37 q+ 14:54:40 zkoch: I also support biometrics and subscription use cases for v1 14:54:52 +1 for subscriptions. Anecdotally, we have heard great demand for subscriptions from merchants who use Apple Pay in app. 14:54:55 q- 14:55:05 Manu: we tried to be very agressive about cutting down the scope of v1 14:55:10 q+ 14:55:11 q? 14:55:15 ack jh 14:55:36 q- 14:55:42 Joerg: there should be ways to avoid getting into details of authentication 14:56:01 +1 generic approach. as long as we’re not limiting use cases to solely passwords in version 1 14:56:05 +1 14:56:14 +1 14:56:20 jeff has joined #wpay 14:56:27 +1, generic approach with one biometric use case 14:56:47 +1 on subscriptions. also transactions designated by a payer agent - for example, my Nest thermostat orders a air filter on my behalf once winter arrives 14:56:51 CyrilV has joined #wpay 14:56:55 Kristy: we should talk about biometrics, and wonder how the use cases involve it 14:57:06 q? 14:57:08 q+ 14:57:11 The second piece is about privacy, this is more of an assumption than a use case 14:57:16 q+ 14:57:18 ack Kr 14:57:32 Manu: every single use case has a field for privacy 14:57:36 ack eve 14:57:36 evert, you wanted to discuss payment elements 14:57:47 q+ schutzer 14:57:52 Please add Dan on Queue 14:58:02 Evert: I want to get back to peeling the onion! I want to see payments in 6 simple steps 14:58:14 identification of the parties 14:58:24 authentication of the payer 14:58:39 confirmation on the availability of funds 14:58:45 and finally settlement 14:58:57 and finally Settlements 14:59:00 These are the core elements 14:59:32 Manu: where should these be described, in the use cases doc? 14:59:36 q? 14:59:37 q? 14:59:40 ack de 14:59:40 dezell, you wanted to talk about the "small primitive" approach. 14:59:45 q+ 15:00:14 David: For NACS, the most important use cases were on payer initiated payments. 15:01:23 I am missing soft identity. Websites are used to dealing with soft identity for offering discounts etc. 15:01:24 q? 15:01:48 q+ to talk about principle of least information in use cases related to identity 15:01:50 This probably doesn’t belong in the identity bucket. 15:02:07 isn't the soft identity part of loyalty? 15:02:30 q+ 15:02:36 Arjun: I want to get back to privacy. We’re seeing a lot more interest in scheduled and recurring payments 15:02:38 +1 on scheduled payments 15:02:39 +1 soft identity 15:02:42 Per Davids point.....Is 'soft identity' a 'single identifier' semi-authentication user case? 15:03:06 q? 15:03:07 ack Eri 15:03:12 Is recurring payments essential to v1? 15:03:41 Erik: Bloomberg has 15 years of experience with biometrics. These tend to shift over time so we use them to unlock capabilities 15:04:03 It's appealing but not essential 15:04:06 +1 on Erik's biometric insights 15:04:24 q+ 15:04:25 q? 15:04:26 +1 on Erik's 15:04:27 q? 15:04:32 q- 15:04:40 ack Ar 15:04:45 ac Cy 15:04:49 ack Cy 15:05:05 Cyril: ?? 15:06:03 Cyril: I want to come back on the funds available point, when it is payer initiated you may have more information available 15:06:37 q? 15:06:39 It isn’t just about funds present, but about the risk management 15:06:41 ack sch 15:07:22 q+ to say that confirmation of a payment does not mean funds are present but that the PSP of the Payer takes up an obligation to the PSP of the Payee 15:07:22 Dan: biometrics can be related to liability, and I wouldn’t want us to drop them from v1 15:07:29 ack ry 15:07:42 q+ to ask about biometrics 15:07:48 yes, there are other possibilties for biometrics, e.g EMVCo 15:07:49 Kristy has joined #wpay 15:08:05 Katie asks Erik about biometrics in the flow 15:08:51 We could move use cases into the V1 block with your help (volunteers needed) 15:08:53 q+ 15:09:03 ack pad 15:09:03 padler, you wanted to talk about principle of least information in use cases related to identity 15:09:13 +q 15:09:20 q+ aylcw3c 15:09:21 Q+ 15:09:35 Pat: we would want to default to more private transactions 15:09:57 For low value transactions, biometrics aren’t justified 15:10:41 Manu: any modifications to the use cases? 15:10:57 Pat: not, it is more about clarifying the needs 15:11:03 q+ 15:11:07 ack ada 15:11:37 [Decomposing -> capabilities] 15:11:39 q- 15:11:55 anarkat has left #wpay 15:11:58 +1 to adamm 15:12:17 Adam: rather than consider the use cases as the starting point for standards, I would prefer us to use them as input to requirements discussion. We want to ensure that the various standard primitives are consistent 15:12:40 Ian interjects: the capabilities document is where we are addressing this 15:12:45 ack eve 15:12:45 evert, you wanted to say that confirmation of a payment does not mean funds are present but that the PSP of the Payer takes up an obligation to the PSP of the Payee 15:13:54 Evert: We need to provide a hook for strong authentication as part of the capabilities and it is then up to the payment services provider as to what they need 15:14:45 Ian: can Wendy say a few words about authentication when we get to that part of the agenda 15:14:57 Matt joins the call 15:15:04 Wendy: yes, I will 15:15:21 Wendy: we will get to authentication when it is time in the agenda. 15:15:30 Dipan has joined #wpay 15:15:44 q? 15:15:49 ack Ian 15:15:49 Ian, you wanted to ask about biometrics 15:15:49 ack Ian 15:15:57 ack ni 15:16:06 q+ to ask about process for pruning use cases v1 15:16:23 Nick: we need to cover reversals and refunds and are lacking good use cases 15:16:49 (Side note we have 6.4.3 Refunds in the doc -> http://www.w3.org/TR/2015/WD-web-payments-use-cases-20150416/) 15:16:56 +1 on reversals / refunds / exception management 15:17:11 +1 on chargebacks 15:17:37 rrsagent, make minutes 15:17:37 I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2015/06/16-wpay-minutes.html wseltzer 15:17:49 Arie: we need to address the regulators’ requirements in the primitives and need use cases for that 15:18:05 I am happy to help with that 15:18:06 q? 15:18:31 q+ 15:18:34 +1 to a regulatory annotation on use cases 15:18:39 Manu: every use case has sections for privacy, security and maybe we should add a regulatory section too 15:18:39 ack ay 15:18:50 s/Manu points to/Manu: pointing to 15:19:00 +1 to adding a Regulatory section to each use case 15:19:12 Manu asks Nick to list which uses cases to add/remove from v1 15:19:15 please call on me before Nick confirms 15:19:27 +1 for hearing from Nick on what should be pulled out 15:19:41 q+ re biometrics 15:19:50 Erik: can we ask for a show of hands around covering biometrics in v1? 15:19:54 ack Ian 15:19:54 Ian, you wanted to ask about process for pruning use cases v1 15:20:35 Ian: one thought was to give ourselves time to consider which use cases to prune 15:21:07 If people really want changes for v1 I encourage you to email Manu on the list. 15:21:32 ack Eri 15:21:59 q+ to talk about small flows and other standards 15:22:09 Erik: Bloomberg regards chargeback etc as part of the business process and not really in scope for W3C to standardise 15:22:24 My proposal: put up a generic AuthN case opposed to addressing biometry and FIDO, and others... 15:22:27 *good point Erick* 15:23:04 Manu: is everyone ready to okay the list of v1 use cases as currently shown on the wiki? 15:23:07 jheuer: I could get behind that 15:23:39 q? 15:23:47 Nick wants to drop a couple of use cases, and others have proposed adding subscriptions 15:24:33 *throws chair* over privacy 15:24:55 q? 15:25:00 zakim, close the queue 15:25:00 ok, Ian, the speaker queue is closed 15:25:16 Nick: you could take out invoices, payer privacy, and think we only need one multifactor authentication use case 15:25:31 q+ to say may be difficult to do payer initiated payments to merchants w/o invoices 15:25:35 q? 15:25:39 1? 15:25:43 q? 15:25:54 q- 15:26:02 Ian: do we need to change the name from invoice to something much narrower 15:26:24 Manu: yes, it wasn’t supposed to be anymore than the very minimum 15:26:26 IJ: Please let's clarify the use cases doc so that we distinguish "invoice-as-a-small-blob-of-data" from "invoice with a bigger meaning like line-item of products purchased" 15:26:43 q? 15:26:47 Manu: can we do a show of hands re use cases 15:26:48 +1 for one at a time 15:26:49 q+ 15:26:52 ack wen 15:27:00 +1 for one at a time 15:27:29 We seem to have confusion about the distinction between an "offer" and an "invoice" 15:27:35 q+ 15:27:35 how is selection of payer instruments 'payer privacy?' 15:27:39 (IJ notes that the "detailed requirements work" in this IG will continue after the FTF meeting) 15:27:43 Wendy: we will talk more about authentication tomorrow. This IG has a valuable role to help provide use cases and requirements to W3C work on authentication, e.g. specific biometric or other factor. 15:27:51 q? 15:27:55 ack ws 15:27:55 wseltzer, you wanted to discuss biometrics 15:27:56 (Based on the prioritized use cases and capabilities) 15:28:00 q- 15:28:02 ack de 15:28:02 dezell, you wanted to talk about small flows and other standards 15:28:47 David: we worked hard on the segmentation of payment flows as this makes it easier to align with 20022. 15:29:00 i believe selection of payer instruments = “payer privacy” in the sense the contents of a user’s wallet / available payment instruments is privacy 15:29:07 im in the queue 15:29:11 q? 15:29:16 What happens to use cases not prioritized in version 1 ? Since the timeline to deliver standards is 2-3 years out, does one have to wait that long ? 15:29:18 Manu prepares the ground for the show of hands 15:29:18 should have been 15:30:15 Adam: a quick question about the things we’re going to vote on, I am not sure about the question on privacy 15:30:40 6.2.2 Selection of Payment Instruments 15:30:48 Payer Privacy 15:30:49 Payer Privacy 15:31:01 Manu: merchants should not need to ask for which payment instruments the payer has available as that is a privacy issue for payers 15:31:08 Ian clarifies … 15:31:34 Perhaps we should change the label to discovery privacy (Katie concurs) 15:32:22 Suggest changing the name of 'Payer Privacy' to 'Discovery Privacy' for the use case name 15:32:31 Ian: merchants may be willing to offer inducements to payers for personal info 15:32:41 Manu: let’s push that off for now 15:33:28 (we are running over the time for this session) 15:34:14 Manu: who wants to see invoices taken out (11) kept in (9) 15:34:32 invoices kept in +1 15:35:00 Manu: who wants to see discovery privacy taken out (2) in (lots) 15:35:21 q+ 15:35:40 Manu: password based authentication taken out (8) kept in (10) 15:35:57 were we going to vote on biometrics / generic authentication? 15:36:09 Manu: is there rough consensus that we keep the rest as described in the wiki? 15:36:33 q+ 15:37:20 Kristy has joined #wpay 15:37:35 Dave wonders about support for adding subscription use cases? 15:37:54 Are we renaming MISSING USE CASE to encompass generic auth or just passwords? 15:37:54 We will come back to the use cases tomorrow 15:38:39 Manu: does everyone agree with the list in the wiki less the ones now in red? 15:38:44 There are still some items on the list that I don't know what they are 15:40:01 Ian: we have a session on what next for uses on June 18 15:41:20 dbaron: I am unclear how some of the use cases relate to web standards 15:41:33 q? 15:41:37 Ian asks dbaron to write up his questions for discussion tomorow 15:42:11 Pat: if we remove invoices we can’t do push payments 15:42:22 Manu: we can talk about that tomorrow 15:43:03 Manu: is there a rough consensus about the current list less the ones in red (yes from most people in the room) 15:43:05 http://bit.ly/1MZml8a 15:43:12 what was the URL with the list that we were just looking at on screen? 15:43:13 please move mic close to zach 15:43:17 Topic: Browser perspective (Zach Koch) 15:43:23 zkoch has joined #wpay 15:43:30 -> http://www.w3.org/2015/06/browser_perspective.pdf Zach's presentation 15:43:30 dbaron, I think the list is here: 15:43:31 https://www.w3.org/Payments/IG/wiki/Main_Page/FTF_June2015/UseCases 15:43:32 this one works: http://bit.ly/1MZml8a 15:44:00 slides at http://www.w3.org/2015/06/browser_perspective.pdf 15:44:38 Zach: I work at Google on the chrome browser 15:44:46 q? 15:44:57 This my take on what payments should look like in the browsere 15:46:12 scribenick: m4nu 15:46:22 Zack: People spend a good bit of time online transacting 15:46:36 Zack: We care about great web experiences, needs to be fast, and secure 15:46:50 Zack: We want to make sure developers can rely on the Web to be successful 15:47:04 Zack: We want to continue being free and open. 15:47:28 Zack: Buying and selling things on the Web is a terrible experience, lots you have to care about as a developer. 15:47:58 Zack: PCI compliance - typing in CVCs, numbers, is difficult 15:48:12 Zack: Shopping card abandonment is pretty bad. 15:48:30 Zack: time spent shopping online is on mobile... >50% 15:49:11 Zack: This is a user pain point - we want to provide a better way - we care. 15:49:51 Zack: Here's an example of a complicated flow - facilitate payment process - good mobile experience. Why can't I just pay w/ my thumb? 15:50:01 Zack: Stripe has a good way of doing this. 15:50:18 Zack: Where the web is like - long way off in UX. 15:50:30 Zack: Chrome launched autofill in 2010 15:50:50 Zack: Helped people complete form fields faster - Firefox also does that now... forms are a painpoint, let's let them do it faster. 15:51:14 Zack: In 2013 - RequestAutocomplete - WHATWG spec around letting browser control experience around credit card input. 15:51:42 Zack: Browser UI handled things like internationalization, optimization for mobile, validation was taken care of... it was not very successful - it didn't get adopted by merchants or other browsers. 15:52:15 Zack: The other interesting thing, in 2013 - MozPay - a much more robust line of thinking from RequestAutocomplete... full scale API for payment instrument.s 15:52:28 Zack: it went over to FirefoxOS and doesn't have a strong presence on the Web. 15:52:44 Zack: in 2015, we're back to autofill. 15:53:14 Zack: It's a big pain point for users... we view this as stop-gap measures. It's us trying to make it as least painful as possible. That's why we're interested in this group around Web Payments. 15:53:51 Zack: Some lessons learned - merchants tend to be averse to making changes - you can create a great API, but that doesn't mean merchants will integrate. They tend to have few dev resources - checkout flows are very optimized for things like upsells. 15:53:53 q+ to talk about "why merchants adopt" 15:54:03 zakim, open the queue 15:54:03 ok, dezell2, the speaker queue is open 15:54:08 q+ to talk about "why merchants adopt" 15:54:11 q+ 15:54:17 Zack: You have to make a strong case for implementation. 15:54:50 Zack: Merchants are concerned with their bottom line - the question they're going to ask - does this drive more convergence? 15:54:57 Zack: We have to incentivize correctly. 15:55:14 Zack: We can waive a great technology in front of merchants, but hard to get them into it. (merchants) 15:55:42 Zack: For a browser, we want a it to be open secure etc. 15:55:51 q+ to ask if merchants need inclusion of support for loyalty schemes etc. to justify investment in switching to new standard 15:56:01 another thing merchants are interested in - maximizing conversion 15:56:19 q+ 15:56:31 Zack: Browsers sit in a really cool, interesting place. Browser can be a really cool facilitator - great UX - high assurance levels to CnP transactions - stronger notion of person that's buying is who is on the credit card. We are excited about tokenization. 15:56:50 Zack: Browsers can be great facilitators of Web Payments - browser is in a great position to help facilitate that process. 15:57:00 Zack: I don't think we have any desire to be a wallet 15:57:26 Zack: There are a few things that have immediate impact - selection of instruments, can we display payment instruments? 15:57:41 Zack: Authentication/access to instruments - unlock instruments w/ biometrics... tokenizations. 15:57:51 q+ to ask about selection of instruments 15:57:55 Zack: Two things that are important - subscriptions and biometrics 15:58:28 Zack: Very important on the Web. Merchant integration - If target has a mobile application, you can get same experience on Web as well as brick and mortar. 15:58:33 q+ 15:59:02 Srikant: Selection of instruments? Automatic selection? How is that possible when we have multiple devices? 15:59:40 Zack: You would need some kind of sync... I don't think browser should store that. 15:59:49 ack dezell2 15:59:52 ack dezell 15:59:52 dezell, you wanted to talk about "why merchants adopt" 16:00:17 q+ 16:01:04 dezell: with my w3c hat on, you've hit all the high notes... walled garden approach is problematic. Company X provides a toolkit for your app - that's great, because devs want to get things done quickly. 16:01:21 dezell: It's not that peopel haven't solved this problem... it's that it hasn't been solved in a way that's truly scalable. 16:01:36 q+ 16:01:48 dezell: I'm wearing my NACS (National Association of Convenience Stores) hat right now... merchants want data. When people started giving out oil credit cards, they did that because they could collect information. 16:01:53 Katie: Everybody wants data. 16:02:59 q? 16:03:08 ack La 16:03:18 q+ 16:03:32 Zack: For in-app purchases - TEE, tokenized transactions - how do we bring that same technology to the Web... if those make sense - can we push that out to Web Apps. 16:03:32 q+ 16:04:35 +1 to the need for browser APIs. How to restart the interest? 16:04:42 Laurent: Maybe this is a question for later - how to get interoperability for biometrics or IR level - call wallet directly from browser - what is the right interaction? 16:04:51 Laurent: Maybe it's a little too soon for that question? 16:05:02 ack dsr 16:05:02 dsr, you wanted to ask if merchants need inclusion of support for loyalty schemes etc. to justify investment in switching to new standard 16:05:06 Zack: I don't have any clear cut ideas yet - don't know yet, hope to find that out from the group. 16:05:16 dsr: What are the minimal set of primitives that we need? 16:05:32 dsr: Worrying about incentives - if we don't have enough in there - maybe merchants won't switch? 16:05:45 q+ joerg 16:06:24 Zack: I think that this is about reducing user friction - does cart abandonment rate decrease when we get some of this stuff in place? 16:06:28 Zack: That's one way 16:06:48 Zack: Another way - can we reduce fraud - merchants spend $3.5B on fraud - liability shifts. 16:06:51 q+ to talk about customer UX and merchant simplification because of ability to use and accept multiple brands of payments.. 16:07:06 Zack: In EMVCo spec - issuing banks may want to shift liability. 16:07:12 ack next 16:07:15 Kristy has joined #wpay 16:07:17 ack vishshastry 16:07:31 q 16:07:36 q+ 16:07:39 Vish: About liability shift - one of the things you have to think about - it's not merchant, it's issuing bank. 16:08:00 Vish: Part of what has to happen - understanding - there's a broken framework today - it wasn't designed for the Web. 16:08:19 3DS 2.0 is just gearing up now 16:08:32 Vish: 3D secure was there... it can be fixed w/ EMVCo - banks have different perspectives on how to fix that - banks hand out cards to their customers in India - row/column on paper cards. 16:08:46 *what dezell2 said* 16:09:32 Vish: Two things - merchant needs - merchants care about upsell on warranty - or I'm selling a digital good, need it to be fast. 16:10:04 Vish: Folks at Apple Pay, Android Pay have been rapidly eliminating friction points. 16:10:14 q+ 16:10:28 ack AdrianHB 16:10:28 AdrianHB, you wanted to ask about selection of instruments 16:11:23 AdrianHB: Wanted to ask other browser vendors - question around integration - what you're talking about is a secure environment - there is a handoff from browser to something else - firm prompts me - which app do you want to use? User experience should follow customerm where they want to go. 16:11:47 AdrianHB: It makes sense that browser on phone, I click pay - I get handed off to something else - want to perform the pay action - you have 5 apps that can handle this. 16:11:58 AdrianHB: Is that how the browser vendors see it working? 16:12:13 AdrianHB: The easy way is custom protocol schemes... 16:12:13 q? 16:12:52 Zack: The concern that I have is that you send this out to external apps - so that becomes a bad UX in many cases - that's my primary concern - reasonable approach. I'm open to all of it. Completely possible. 16:12:58 ack Ryladog 16:13:06 q+ for web+browser what's first 16:13:36 Katie: A couple of things - merchants are not the only people that want your data - more data points you have, the more you can personalize the experience, but it puts organizations in the position of being data protectors. 16:14:02 Katie: With that in mind, come huge responsibilities - 17,000 data points on a user with some folks I'm familiar with. 16:14:36 Katie: I want the experience to be better, but I want to make sure there is informed consent when they're releasing their data. That's a screen that can't go away - since this is W3C, we have to make sure we take that into account. 16:14:41 ack mountie 16:14:48 Kristy has joined #wpay 16:15:18 q+ to comment about ties between browser and OS 16:15:53 mountie: From my experience - the Payment Service Provider handles the user experience. In W3C, there isn't consensus when user environment is compromised - maybe this can be out of scope of this group. This is important, payment case 16:16:08 mountie: We have to think about security and privacy in a compromised environment. 16:16:09 ack Erik 16:17:03 Erik: We'll talk about liability shift on security side of things - US Fed is talking about liability shifts on end users... merchants love data, but as soon as data is breached, you are now liable - data needs to be secured end-to-end, otherwise you're liable. Merchants moving over to more secure mechanisms. 16:17:28 Erik: They are attacking the merchants, they're not attacking the payment networks w/ the same level of aggressiveness - they're going to the path of least resistance. 16:17:41 q? 16:17:47 q+ comment on personalization vs privacy 16:17:47 ack nick 16:18:44 Nick: Merchants value lower rates for payments - that's why there is MCX and CurrentC 16:18:59 ack Ian 16:19:00 ack Ian 16:19:39 Ian: With the meeting goal of what should we be standardizing - in particular because Apple, Mozilla, and Google are new - we want to draw diagram based on what we think we'd like to do - in breakout or in a session - does this architecture make sense? 16:20:19 Ian: To David Baron's earlier point - we'd be interested in talking about those things in more detail. It'll become clearer once we've walked through the charters a bit. 16:20:30 q- 16:20:44 Ian: Would browser folks like to get an up close view on what we've been thinking - ultimately, the goal that browser folks are supportive of ultimate work in this area. 16:20:51 +1 for a browser vendor led discussion of proposed patterns 16:20:55 q- comment 16:21:35 Sam: I'd like to understand what the flow looks like - I don't understand the Web payments flow because it's very abstract. 16:21:36 +1 on a break out session on flow 16:21:47 Ian: Great, let's do a breakout candidate on there. 16:21:47 ack joerg 16:22:07 Thank you Manu. Katie's point was also that the confirmation for a transaction screen should never go away for this is in essence a contract - and and accessibility requirements in WCAG 2, 3.3.4 Error Prevention (Legal, Financial, Data): For Web pages that cause legal commitments or financial transactions for the user to occur, that modify or delete user-controllable data in data storage systems, or that submit user test responses, at least one[CUT] 16:22:08 +1 on flow - and to bring 3DS 2.0 into that conversation 16:22:36 Joerg: First, big thanks for the presentation - big opportunities here - pattern around payments and pairing them to loyalty/coupons - agnostic of security and form of communication. 16:23:08 q? 16:23:26 Joerg: How to connect to browser to get to right events... Chrome has said they don't want add ons now - on each platform we have different types of solutions - is there a chance for browsers to support interoperability for the same of initiating and authorizing transactions. 16:23:47 ack padler 16:23:47 padler, you wanted to talk about customer UX and merchant simplification because of ability to use and accept multiple brands of payments.. 16:24:24 padler: From browser perspective - notion that payment instruments - sometimes it's local, sometimes it's not - you may have a device that have access to the payment instruments, or you may not. 16:25:01 padler: How do we represent that in the payment flow? Can browsers make a callout? We have some models - how does it work? We don't want the George Castanza problem (gigantic wallet where you carry everything) 16:25:06 zakim, close the queue 16:25:06 ok, dezell2, the speaker queue is closed 16:25:07 ack Kristy 16:25:10 ? 16:25:14 q? 16:26:00 Kristy: When we talk about merchants and incentives - when we solve for it the first time - it'll be something merchants want to adopt. If it solves a peripheral problem, that's not good... it needs to solve core problems. Love the liability shift issue - happy to talk offline about that. 16:26:18 Liability is directly linked to risk 16:26:26 Kristy: Solve for the big problem - you don't need to shift liability to do that 16:26:28 weinig has joined #wpay 16:26:42 q? 16:26:42 Kristy: Don't try to come up w/ incentives - get the merchants to the table, solve the problem collectively. 16:26:45 ack adamm 16:26:49 ack ad 16:27:07 Liability sits with the party introducing the most risk 16:27:31 Adam: Having backchannel conversation w/ folks at Mozilla - confused by motivation for single payment interface standard. Google standard hasn't been widely adopted, FirefoxOS isn't something that's been widely adopted. 16:28:28 Adam: Different payer providers have their own toolkit - implement inside of their own interfaces,,, swap out one payment provider for another - it's just something that you can rip out and replace w/ functional equivalent - coupons / promotions - becomes just another payment instrument - nothing special about payment instrument. 16:29:01 Adam: This feels like a solution in search of a problem for me - some see process flow as differentiators. 16:29:08 [IJ: These are great points from Adam] 16:29:29 adamm - not that easy to rip/replace payment gateways. many provide differentiated capabilities (e.g. proprietary tokenization, risk scoring, etc.) - not easy for merchants to switch 16:29:43 q? 16:29:45 Adam: If we come up with a standard, I don't think we'll be able to do something better for their customers - what they find value in, there is a risk of creating a complex standard that doesn't appeal to parties that they have access to. 16:29:49 ack dezell 16:29:49 dezell, you wanted to discuss web+browser what's first 16:30:05 [Since queue is closed, I'll try to briefly address Adam's points. As Zach described in his presentation, payments mess is getting worse. We owe it to stakeholders to try to fix it. The fact that previous single vendor efforts failed doesn't mean we shouldn't fix it as an industry.] 16:30:15 dezell: Creating a complex standard is a common theme in our industry - this is the name of the game - 16:30:49 dezell: Vish you mentioned liability shift - liability shift is EMVCo upgrade or merchants are liable - now we're hearing liability shift to merchants, but may not stay there long. 16:31:27 dezell: We're trying to keep our head above water - only other point I wanted to make - degree of protection on two systems is going to be quite different. 16:31:41 Vish: I didn't say payment networks are going to take on liability 16:32:07 Vish: I'm saying that we want a better user experience, providing data to the people that actually need the data. 16:32:42 Vish: The payment network does not know the customer - American Express does, but Visa and MasterCard doesn't - we don't have enough information to make that decision. 16:33:06 dezell: Ok, I misunderstood. Who is coming to dinner (we need a count) be ready to raise your hands. 16:33:41 dbaron: I'm not sure about deferring to OS - some are current, some are very old - we want users across all those OSes to be able to participate in the Web as fully as they can. 16:33:42 +1 to david 16:33:51 q? 16:33:54 ack dbaron 16:33:54 dbaron, you wanted to comment about ties between browser and OS 16:35:05 rrsagent, make minutes 16:35:05 I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2015/06/16-wpay-minutes.html Ian 16:35:05 dbaron explained why firefox has its own CA store, for example 16:35:10 [lunch: return at 1:30] 16:35:11 evert has joined #wpay 16:37:36 dsr has joined #wpay 16:39:36 mountie has joined #wpay 16:40:12 yaso1 has joined #wpay 16:52:16 nick has joined #wpay 16:53:41 AdrianHB has joined #wpay 17:03:51 nick has joined #wpay 17:09:47 nick has joined #wpay 17:16:46 AdrianHB has joined #wpay 17:18:38 mountie has joined #wpay 17:24:58 weinig has joined #wpay 17:27:14 AdrianHB has joined #wpay 17:31:24 mtiggas has joined #wpay 17:32:18 manu` has joined #wpay 17:33:28 nick has joined #wpay 17:33:34 dsr has joined #wpay 17:34:23 Srikanth has joined #wpay 17:34:51 aylcw3c has joined #wpay 17:34:57 evert has joined #wpay 17:34:59 scribe: yaso 17:35:05 topic: Card security and the Web model 17:35:38 zkoch has joined #wpay 17:35:57 Leandro has joined #WPAY 17:36:23 -> http://www.w3.org/2015/06/secure_elements.pptx presentation on Secure elements 17:38:27 q? 17:38:57 padler has joined #wpay 17:39:11 laurent: replacement cycle usually 2-3 years 17:39:25 ... no patch mechanism in the field, so what you put in the field stays there 17:39:37 Magda has joined #wpay 17:41:23 Magda1 has joined #wpay 17:42:41 aylcw3c has joined #wpay 17:43:08 Erik has joined #wpay 17:43:52 zakim, who is making noise? 17:43:52 sorry, dezell2, I don't know what conference this is 17:44:45 Ryladog has joined #wpay 17:44:56 zakim, this is wpay 17:44:56 sorry, manu`, I do not see a conference named 'wpay' in progress or scheduled at this time 17:46:19 q+ to get update on authentication WGs from Wendy - any chance that this cross origin vs. same origin TEE could be resolved? 17:46:25 zakim, open the queue 17:46:25 ok, manu`, the speaker queue is open 17:46:30 q+ to get update on authentication WGs from Wendy - any chance that this cross origin vs. same origin TEE could be resolved? 17:47:39 +1 to poking yaso1 17:48:11 CyrilV has joined #wpay 17:48:39 laurent: talks through the following presentation: http://www.w3.org/2015/06/secure_elements.pptx 17:48:59 [scribing to resume with Q&A] 17:50:44 q+ 17:51:38 q+ to ask if anyone in the room can elaborate on why previous standardisation attempts (eg: Microsoft SmartCard) failed 17:51:43 q+ 17:53:00 ADAMM has joined #wpay 17:53:11 q+ 17:53:16 adamm has joined #wpay 17:53:19 evan_schwartz has joined #wpay 17:53:53 zakim, who is on the queue? 17:53:53 I see manu`, vishshastry, AdrianHB, nick, mountie on the speaker queue 17:54:01 zakim, who is on the phone? 17:54:01 sorry, manu`, I don't know what conference this is 17:54:03 On IRC I see evan_schwartz, adamm, CyrilV, Ryladog, Erik_Bloomberg, aylcw3c, Magda1, padler, Leandro, zkoch, evert, Srikanth, dsr, nick, manu`, mtiggas, AdrianHB, weinig, mountie, 17:54:03 ... yaso1, Dipan, jheuer, dezell2, vishshastry, screen, Zakim, stefan_thomas, nicktr, RRSAgent, dbaron, Laurent_, chaals, schuki, manu, Ian, wseltzer, trackbot 17:54:25 q? 17:54:29 q? 17:54:42 ack man 17:54:42 manu`, you wanted to get update on authentication WGs from Wendy - any chance that this cross origin vs. same origin TEE could be resolved? 17:55:00 manu: when will we talk about the auth WGs (directed at Wendy)? 17:55:31 ... I thought that this work had failed, has something changed that we are still pursuing 17:55:56 laurent: not enough motivating use cases (very restricted) 17:56:14 ... Web Payments presents a new compelling use case 17:56:41 ... no guarantee that all issues have been solved 17:57:14 q+ 17:57:21 jeff has joined #wpay 17:57:26 wendy: I am on the agenda tomorrow after lunch 17:57:34 ... will discuss the pre-charter WGs 17:58:00 ... web payments use case are helping to make the case for these WGs 17:58:25 q? 17:58:32 ack vish 17:58:45 vishshastry: future view Apple and Google are showing ways to leverage secure elements for transactions 17:58:59 ... not a stretch to extend to Web 17:59:17 ... Apple has tightly bound hardware to the flow 17:59:22 Leandro has joined #wpay 17:59:34 ... need to move to a cloud based model (such as HCE) 18:00:02 ... Visa is actively working on this credential use case 18:00:26 ... will have some APIs out this year 18:00:34 q+ 18:00:42 Laurent_: We should leave auth to the account issuer 18:01:03 ... the networks define rules for access 18:01:26 vishshastry: I agree with SE tech but it's not great for all use cases 18:02:05 q? 18:02:09 ack AdrianHB 18:02:09 AdrianHB, you wanted to ask if anyone in the room can elaborate on why previous standardisation attempts (eg: Microsoft SmartCard) failed 18:02:44 Laurent_: MS solution was at OS level 18:03:02 ... opening to Web had security considerations 18:03:10 ... plus the lack of use cases 18:03:21 ack nick 18:04:26 nick: Android have made a decision to not put a secure element in their devices. How do you propose to deal with this approach? 18:05:06 Laurent_ : There are fall-backs from full Se based solution to something like HCE 18:05:14 ... choice will be based on the use case and risk 18:05:37 @nick that's where we think about cloud based authentication. device can authenticate itself to a cloud entity, cloud can provide transactional data (i.e. token + cryptogram) if risk parameters haven't been exceeded. 18:06:25 +1 Laurent's point about why SEs have been slower to evolve 18:06:34 nick: SE is very restricted why is that 18:06:45 Laurent_: mostly price 18:07:12 q? 18:07:30 jyrossi has joined #wpay 18:07:42 q+ re security models 18:07:57 mountie: Web sec based on SOP what is the plan to adapt SE to this model? 18:08:26 Laurent_: SE already has separate apps but we need to now tie these to an origin 18:08:42 q? 18:09:00 ... we are defining an interface that would allow an origin to be loaded as part of the SE app meta data 18:09:16 [we=GlobalPlatform] 18:10:26 Erik_Bloomberg: If we use SEs I want to make the case to use it protect data not just perform auth 18:11:07 q+ 18:11:17 q- 18:11:19 ... Google ProjectVault is attemting to put SE in microSD so I think they do support SE based solution 18:11:25 +1 to on-device SEs being preferable to cloud based solutions 18:11:27 ack mountie 18:11:28 ack Erik_Bloomberg 18:11:28 q+ 18:11:40 ack jh 18:12:14 jheuer: use of credit card applet on a SE controlled through a wallet app already adheres to the goals of the group 18:12:25 to say that disposable SD card tohold a secure element is an inteoperable solution for desparate devices/channels/OSs 18:12:32 ... would be wise to draw the lines so that we somehow consider this case 18:12:53 IanJacobs has joined #wpay 18:13:19 ... cloud doesn't solve all cases because we need to still harden the identity 18:13:50 But 18:13:54 But 18:14:00 ... we should make use of this tech because it is already out there although we have not in the past been able to open these technologies up 18:14:22 Q? 18:15:19 ... we need to find ways to make these technologies available to the Web (they are slow and old but still the most secure) 18:15:46 ... if we consider IoT we need to solve this problem too proving that a hardware actor is who they claim to be) 18:16:07 Laurent_: Does that make you a volunteer? 18:16:18 +1 for IOT actors 18:16:26 jheuer: Yes, or one of my colleagues 18:16:51 BiAb 18:17:13 wseltzer: One of the places we hit difficulty is the difference between the security models 18:17:20 ... between SEs and the Web 18:17:56 .. both are secure 18:18:14 ... we need to figure out how SEs fit into the web model 18:18:16 q+ 18:18:26 ... are they "super-cookies" or similar? 18:18:26 ack ws 18:18:26 wseltzer, you wanted to discuss security models 18:18:27 q- 18:18:40 ... look forward to thinking through this 18:18:46 ack Ryl 18:19:16 Ryladog: What si the argument against using a hardware SE with a web based payment? 18:19:37 q+ to make an argument against (playing devil's advocate) 18:19:42 q+ 18:19:43 Laurent_: There is no argument against it, I believe it should be one of the use cases 18:20:01 ... complexity of deployment means we need to support many solutions 18:20:18 ack jeff 18:21:07 q+ 18:21:34 jeff: we have discussed the different security models but we have compromises we must make to bring them together so it occurs to me that solving the most important use cases is a good way to start 18:21:53 q+ 18:21:58 Laurent_: Payments is probably the best candidate 18:22:02 Magda has joined #wpay 18:22:31 ... (identity is too broad) 18:22:39 q+ 18:22:47 q- 18:23:26 Zakim, close queue 18:23:26 ok, Erik_Bloomberg, the speaker queue is closed 18:23:34 offline pt 1) can't ensure that devices have SEs - many do not and will not due to cost / complexity 18:23:42 manu: Argument against SE in the critical path is that they are not required for MVP 18:24:06 +1 18:24:07 ... many payments we do today don't have SE attached. 18:24:40 ... we need to keep it on the roadmap (and possibly work in parallel) but not put on the critical path 18:24:51 ... speak up if you disagree 18:25:17 offline pt 2) OS (or even browsers) can have deep insight to underlying hardware and there should be a way for consumers to provide informed consent to allow sharing data on their device to authenticate a payment 18:25:26 Laurent_: +1 as long as the credential you use is the payer's problem 18:25:56 q+ to discuss risk and liability 18:26:47 q? 18:26:59 ack manu 18:26:59 manu`, you wanted to make an argument against (playing devil's advocate) 18:27:05 ack man 18:27:08 q+ 18:28:35 ack Erik 18:29:03 Erik_Bloomberg: Web Payments won't be successful without tackling identity and security 18:29:11 Erik - Fin Svcs will not move forward w/o ID and Security 18:29:17 +1 18:29:29 +1 to Erik - security and identity will be essential to web payments 18:29:37 ... those best positioned to solve are the browsers 18:29:49 ... they have the distribution 18:29:53 thinks that Erik is absolutely right - we have to solve ID and authentication - but I don't think it has to be a hardware solution 18:30:27 q? 18:30:34 ... for high value or cross-border SE's will def come into scope 18:31:06 jheuer: Online payments are possible without SEs today but the diff between CP and CNP is significant so there is a financial motivator 18:31:26 ... we need to give a way for the user to have visibility and choice 18:31:38 Q+ 18:31:46 q? 18:31:52 ack jheuer 18:32:40 mountie: consider using existing local resources like camera to provide some form of hardware security (these are already SOP bound) 18:33:01 ack next 18:33:11 ack adamm 18:34:00 adamm: identity is critical but I would caution against focus on specific implementations (of which SE is only one) 18:34:48 q? 18:35:03 each implementation has different security properties so unless we plan on modelling them all I don't see a way we can focus on implementations 18:35:05 q+ to reference EBA requirements 18:35:26 Kristy has joined #wpay 18:35:51 AdrianHB: I think what a lot of people have said - in terms of the way card payments work today - method in which payment is done affects the risk profile and that in turn affects the liability. 18:36:16 +1 to Adrian 18:36:21 nick has joined #wpay 18:36:43 AdrianHB: We need to not think of this as a "yes" or "no" question - but rather a wide range - what security mechanisms were in place, and how was the payer authenticated. We need to standardize that, not specific implementations - standardize the spectrum, and pass it along in the payment message. 18:36:48 1+ to Adrian 18:36:52 dezell: Informed decision that we make beforehand 18:37:01 I don't see the necessity to model them all; rather would I expect us to come up with a 'skeleton' for all kinds of implementations to stick to. Otherwise we'd not be open to innovation. 18:37:02 dezell: Informed decision that we make beforehand 18:37:24 dezell, that means Informed decision that we make beforehand 18:37:24 +1 to authentication context being a piece of information which is applied to payment context.. 18:37:34 dezell2, that means Informed decision that we make beforehand 18:37:45 q+ 18:37:53 See EBA guidelines on the security of internet payments… 18:38:05 IanJacobs has joined #wpay 18:38:12 Topic: Identity/Credentials: What do we need for payments? 18:38:15 zakim, open queue 18:38:15 ok, wseltzer, the speaker queue is open 18:38:19 https://www.w3.org/Payments/IG/wiki/Main_Page/FTF_June2015/Credentials 18:38:23 https://www.w3.org/Payments/IG/wiki/Main_Page/FTF_June2015/Credentials 18:38:25 https://www.w3.org/Payments/IG/wiki/Main_Page/FTF_June2015/Credentials 18:38:44 bites tongue about inverse relationship between payments complexity and standards 'flexibility' :) 18:39:36 manu: [presenting] 18:39:52 zkoch has joined #wpay 18:39:56 manu: let's avoid haggling over definitions in this session 18:40:42 ... let's asses payments use cases that have credentials impact 18:40:56 1) credential use case - am I over 21 etc? 18:41:16 2) using a credential instead of needing to register 18:41:44 3) being able to negotiate insturments without compormising privacy 18:41:56 4) debit pull 18:41:57 5) credit push 18:42:16 6) proofs 18:42:38 manu: [explains post v1 use cases] 18:43:41 ... do we agree that these use cases require credentials? 18:43:42 q+ 18:43:43 q+ 18:43:58 q+ 18:44:02 DJackson has joined #wpay 18:44:16 nick: is registration-less not a "lack of credentials"? 18:44:18 q? 18:44:49 manu: you are giving the merchant data they require (as credentials) instead of needing to register 18:45:11 [this is essentially just in time credentials] 18:45:26 nick: clarify that the credential includes any data about the holder (incl postal address) 18:45:48 Arjun has joined #wpay 18:46:40 ari: for FI a credential needs to verified and it is the verifier that gives it credibility 18:46:44 q+ 18:46:56 q- 18:47:23 q+ 18:47:57 ... identity is defined by credentials but they are not the same thing 18:48:11 q- Erik_Bloomberg 18:48:18 q+ 18:48:48 dezell: difference between profile attributes and credential 18:49:12 +1 +1 +1 18:49:20 schutzer: majority of transactions don't depend on age verification 18:49:27 +1 to leaving it out 18:49:30 ... so I'd leave it out of v1 18:49:59 manu: KYC and AML 18:50:21 kyc is a us regulation, its not a universal global requirement 18:50:32 adamm +1 18:50:50 q+ 18:50:55 q+ 18:51:02 manu: pain points 18:51:16 ... need more information to lower the risk on high-value transactions 18:51:41 ... onboarding 18:52:08 Q? 18:52:17 Matt has joined #wpay 18:52:21 ... merchant adoption of new payment services. 18:52:37 ... i.e., the sign-on from a merchant to a new payment processor 18:52:44 Q+ 18:52:51 ... account creation 18:53:10 ... other industries such as education and health care also have credentialing 18:53:45 q+ 18:53:49 adamm: prepaid credit cards or gift cards. 18:53:55 ... there's both issuance and revocation 18:54:10 ... difference between properties of the person and credentials 18:54:37 q+ to suggest that difference between properties and credentials is based on issuer/signer 18:54:37 ... not every country has the same regulatory requirements 18:54:49 ... individual privacy rules 18:54:50 Identity Theft is a Pain Point 18:55:04 ... so not all should go into a global standard 18:55:10 ack Laurent_ 18:55:12 ack adamm 18:55:27 Laurent_: there are multiple credentials in a payment transaction 18:55:47 q+ 18:55:48 ... between multiple sets of parties 18:56:06 ... some are out of scope, e.g. merchant-PSP 18:56:36 ... take care to specify where we're talking about credentials 18:56:54 q+ 18:57:03 ack Arjun 18:57:25 Arjun: why would you want to incorporate something this complex/ 18:57:32 +1 18:57:34 +1 18:57:45 q+ 18:57:47 ... KYC requirements differ by what action you're taking, what org, etc. 18:58:06 +1 18:58:13 ... what's the bare minimum you need to complete a transaction on the web? 18:58:27 ... I don't think you'll ever have a central ID piece to open a bank account on the web. 18:58:33 ... not in the next 10 years. 18:58:44 manu: not talking about a universal ID registry 18:59:00 q+ to agree with credential focus on payments, but mention the benefits of a slightly wider use. 18:59:12 q+ 18:59:13 Arjun: even the defintiion of KYC-enabled is unclear 18:59:29 schutzer: KYC is more involved in opening account, not the payment 18:59:40 ... AML is non-uniform, variety of transactions 18:59:49 q? 19:00:23 manu: capabilities, relevant groups, next steps. 19:00:41 dezell: lightning queue 19:00:54 I can do my piece in 14 words 19:00:55 ack DJackson 19:01:09 DJackson: we keep mixing metaphors 19:01:21 ... identity to whom. 19:01:28 ... KYC is the bank to the next attribute 19:02:00 ... a valid instrument may not require a credential 19:02:19 ... if I send a verified credential, it shouldn't enable another party to re-use it 19:02:42 ... for alternative purposes. 19:02:53 ... Present credentials for purpose, not "we need to know" 19:03:19 padler: auth, cred, id, matter depending on your place in the pie. context 19:03:55 ack pa 19:03:57 ack ay 19:04:01 ac sr 19:04:03 ack Srikanth 19:04:05 ack Arjun 19:04:10 ack AdrianHB 19:04:10 AdrianHB, you wanted to suggest that difference between properties and credentials is based on issuer/signer 19:04:16 s/ac sr// 19:04:43 AdrianHB: my understanding of credentials cg, is way to pass around verified statements 19:04:50 ... similar to claims-based authorization 19:05:03 ... consumer of the data makes decision whether to trust the verifier 19:05:05 +10 :) 19:05:08 +1 19:05:17 ... extensible. we don't need to talk about hwat the data is, wh the verifier is 19:05:19 ack nick 19:05:25 nick: agree with Adam. 19:05:40 ... this is region-specific. shouldn't be part of standard v1 19:05:46 manu: what about parallel? 19:05:54 nick: so long as it doesn't block the initial standard. 19:05:57 ack CyrilV 19:07:25 CyrilV: credentials as consistency check 19:07:50 ... not a secure element 19:08:01 ack AdrianHB 19:08:04 ack adamm 19:08:22 adamm: another pain point, accessibility to payment systems by underprivileged populations 19:08:32 ... let's not make it more difficult for them to participate 19:08:47 ... start with easier use cases 19:09:07 ... online liquor distributors already have their problems solved 19:09:17 Magda has joined #wpay 19:09:38 ... user of payment instrument and its purchaser don't need to be hte same person 19:10:01 ... get an attorney who's an expert at international privacy law. 19:10:27 ack dez 19:10:27 dezell, you wanted to agree with credential focus on payments, but mention the benefits of a slightly wider use. 19:10:37 dezell: agree with credential focus on payments, but mention the benefits of a slightly wider use. 19:10:53 q+ 19:11:03 ... IFSF deems that credentials useful for more than enabling payment 19:11:14 ... uptake magnified if satisfies more than one case 19:11:24 ack mountie 19:11:40 mountie: credential is one of the contexts 19:12:53 Richard_Varn: educational perspective, pain point 19:12:58 ... mirrors the payments problems 19:13:23 can we also clarify on how long the credentials are valid once acknowledged and how they can be used for seamless guest experience?? 19:13:50 ... we're deconstructing credential, presenting evidence 19:14:08 ... from aggregation and collection to analysis, inference, warranty 19:14:48 ... overlapping in the way we're trying to work, and the toolset 19:15:11 ... credential set for employee 19:15:28 ... licensure, test, credentials, bundle to security 19:15:37 +1 to cumulative evidentiary context (the evidence stack) as part of the payment information... 19:16:08 ... alignment 19:16:31 Eric_Korb: health care area 19:16:42 ... I disagree that there are companies who know how to do it already 19:16:49 ... we want to improve the credentialing 19:16:57 ... and verification along the chain 19:17:24 ... we need to knwo the credential fo the doctor 19:17:33 ... we want to move to machine-to-machine 19:17:33 q+ 19:17:38 nick has joined #wpay 19:18:09 ... drug prescribing 19:18:13 ... dovetails with payments 19:18:25 ... want to clarify: design of credential is privacy-aware 19:18:31 q+ re credentials and affordances 19:18:59 ... you're just asking 'does this person have credential?' not sharing PII 19:19:09 s/asking/answering/ 19:19:57 ... primary source providers to issue the credentials 19:20:10 Richard_Varn: security credentials are not the same as all credentials 19:20:30 ack Erik_Bloomberg 19:20:46 Erik_Bloomberg: credentials are actual evidence that validates your identity 19:20:49 q- 19:20:52 q+ 19:21:03 Agree w Erik Anders on the importance of Credentials in creating an Identity 19:21:11 ... critical to moving forward 19:21:15 ack adamm 19:21:20 +1 19:21:42 adamm: OPM hack 19:22:01 +1 19:22:02 +1 19:22:03 ... let's focus on web payments 19:22:08 +1 19:22:08 +1 19:22:23 ... beware of unintended consequences 19:22:43 ... soft identity has risks too 19:22:47 I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2015/06/16-wpay-minutes.html Ian 19:23:09 ... the metadata problem. you think you're dealing with pseudo-anonymous info, but it's linkable to an individual identity 19:23:18 ack jeff 19:23:30 jeff: heard ~4 points of view 19:23:34 ... 1.0 requirement 19:23:38 ... never a requirement 19:23:45 ... possibly a later requirement 19:23:54 ... no great harm in parallel processing 19:24:12 ... will chairs help us find consensus? 19:24:18 q? 19:24:31 dezell2: sensitive to what we don't know 19:24:33 European Banking Authority: strong authorisation and credentials are mandatory (legislation in progress) 19:24:41 ... add it to a hot topic 19:24:47 ... and aim to leave with consensus 19:25:07 ... if you want to do it, think aout how to convince your compatriots to move. 19:25:24 manu: if we think credentials is something we'll do 19:25:26 ... big if 19:25:39 ... then what we need is cryptographic way of proving claims 19:26:06 scribenick: jeff 19:26:16 manu: Folks will address KYC 19:26:22 ... concerned about portability 19:26:32 ... people should control their credentials, when given out 19:26:35 q+ 19:26:39 ... care deeply about privacy 19:26:55 ... certain class of credentials can make it difficult to find out who it is 19:27:04 ... user consent for credential sharing 19:27:08 q+ 19:27:10 ... minimize prob. of theft 19:27:18 ... theft is really BAD 19:27:37 ... hence hand over minimal information 19:27:48 ... e.g. "I am a citizen"; not "here is my passport" 19:28:00 ... X.9, Credentials CG are also working 19:28:17 ... Open ID connect, SAML 2.0, others 19:28:23 yaso1 has left #wpay 19:28:24 q? 19:28:31 ... even more others 19:28:34 yaso has joined #wpay 19:28:35 q+ 19:28:43 Chairs: q about to close 19:28:49 Manu: Next steps 19:28:51 zakim, close queue 19:28:51 ok, Erik_Bloomberg, the speaker queue is closed 19:28:55 ... need a hot topic 19:29:06 David: Jeff's 4 categories 19:29:18 Manu: Read up, come prepared 19:29:18 CyrilV has joined #wpay 19:29:36 ... should we go alone (payments) or align w ed and health care 19:29:43 [with my privacy hat, I'm concerned about the affordances for "identified web" versus anonymity default] 19:30:01 q? 19:30:01 dbaron: Difference between standardization and research 19:30:06 ack db 19:30:12 ... I'm not hearing what you are modeling after 19:30:20 ... what made them succeed or fail. 19:30:24 Manu: Persona 19:30:31 +1 19:30:42 persona def is one 19:30:52 Laurent: Desirable capabilities - should also be extensible 19:30:56 a big learning experience 19:31:05 and also existing systems are a sign of demand for such a standard 19:31:14 demand for existing systems is ... 19:31:16 ... others regions, schemes should be able to extend 19:31:24 q- 19:31:28 [someone leaves] 19:31:29 q+ 19:31:40 May I ask my question by IRC? 19:31:49 yes 19:32:03 no, that was his question 19:32:06 Q. One goal for this session was to identify payment/ecommerce use cases 19:32:17 ...I missed the beginning of the session. But want to know whether some were brought to light here. 19:32:30 : 19:32:36 Manu: We went through the list of use cases 19:32:38 Also to be part of this session was the question: 19:32:38 What approaches have been tried previously? Which have succeeded (and why) and which have not (and why)? 19:32:40 ... no new ones were added 19:32:41 https://www.w3.org/Payments/IG/wiki/Main_Page/FTF_June2015/Credentials 19:32:45 Ok, thank you. 19:32:50 ... because we focused instead on "should we do this?" 19:32:54 q? 19:32:57 ack Laurent_ 19:33:02 I think the question of "should we do" depends on "here are the needs" 19:33:08 And so wanted to hear those articulated. 19:33:17 So if we do breakout tomorrow, then we should be sure to hear "Needs" from this body 19:33:23 ... some comments were based on folks not fulling understanding what we are saying 19:33:28 q+ 19:33:32 and also experience with technology attempts that have been tried (and if they did not succeed, why not) 19:33:40 ... before decisions (in hot topics) people should read up 19:33:55 tx 19:34:19 Richard: You will need to figure out how to consume evidence about credentials 19:34:19 ... Best if we do that all together 19:36:02 yaso1 has joined #wpay 19:36:34 yaso1 has left #wpay 19:36:35 I can help as well.. 19:36:44 I can be a backup 19:36:48 though I am not as fast as Manu.. :) 19:36:49 yaso1 has joined #wpay 19:37:15 Scribe: Katie Haritos-Shea 19:37:27 evert has joined #wpay 19:37:27 ScribeNick: Ryladog 19:37:51 4:3 formatted version of the next session's presentation: https://www.w3.org/Payments/IG/wiki/images/c/c2/Web-settlement-presentation-2015-06-16.pdf 19:38:02 rrsagent, make minutes 19:38:02 I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2015/06/16-wpay-minutes.html dsr 19:41:51 I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2015/06/16-wpay-minutes.html Ian 19:50:32 Magda has joined #wpay 19:55:23 Magda has joined #wpay 19:58:56 Karen has joined #wpay 20:01:50 Return from break at 4:00 pm EASTERN 20:01:56 evert has joined #wpay 20:02:15 TOPIC: Web Settlement: Exchanging real value on the Web 20:02:26 http://www.w3.org/2015/06/settlement-201506.pdf 20:02:36 rrsagent, make minutes 20:02:36 I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2015/06/16-wpay-minutes.html Ryladog 20:09:39 mountie has joined #wpay 20:09:40 weinig has joined #wpay 20:10:22 Kristy has joined #wpay 20:10:40 Leandro has joined #wpay 20:10:53 Magda has joined #wpay 20:11:53 DE: Introductions for Adrian Hope-Bailie Evan Schwartz Stefan Thomas 20:12:23 AHB: Agenda 20:12:37 adamm has joined #wpay 20:12:59 nick has joined #wpay 20:12:59 .....these areideas that we have been throwing around. We are notsure Settlement on the web is a good idea 20:13:15 zkoch has joined #wpay 20:13:31 ......this ststement todifferentate between promises and real value 20:13:54 ...what does the reciever of the money thinks 20:14:12 .....that is a completely different thing from settlement 20:14:26 Arjun has joined #wpay 20:14:39 ...an actual setttlement is a thing that happns behind the screen through some certralized entity 20:14:45 ....there is a time delay 20:15:15 ...the flow, the setting of obligations and eveyone agreeing is different from the actual settement and the actual deposit 20:15:30 ,,,the ruls of that clearing system determine 20:15:51 .....it talks about discharging 20:16:13 .....today settlement is primarily faciliated by acounterparty 20:16:34 ....the card goes thru the network, done in batch at the end of the day 20:16:55 ....money moves in the centralbank ledger, sometime the next day.. 20:17:19 ...5 party in the 4 corner model 20:17:55 ....settlement involves breaking settlement out of that very centralized paradigm 20:18:23 ....web and web architecture that is decentalized, can we make this appen? 20:18:44 ....to hopefully result in a better experinvce 20:19:04 ....I am giving you three options if you pay mein a way I canget paid sooner 20:19:22 ES: the payer andpayee have to have the same instrument 20:19:33 ....aslong as all have the exact same instrument 20:19:59 ...but thatis not how it works today for emai.....we all dont have to have the same email app 20:20:09 dsr has joined #wpay 20:20:15 ...we thing setttlement can link these walledgardens 20:20:25 ....faster settlement, speed andcost 20:20:51 .....in intlwires are agigantic expense and pain - if you leave one network 20:21:04 ...we want the UX to be great n matter he network 20:21:26 ...we want to increase the speeed - this will increase the volmn 20:21:27 is there an url for this presentation 20:21:32 q+ to ask about settlement next steps - who else is going to participate in the group? when will we see a spec proposal? does it run in parallel? 20:21:38 ....a whole new opprtunity 20:21:39 zakim, open the queue 20:21:39 ok, manu`, the speaker queue is open 20:21:44 q+ to ask about settlement next steps - who else is going to participate in the group? when will we see a spec proposal? does it run in parallel? 20:21:50 ty 20:22:02 .....we want to use the web as settlement rails, using openstandrads 20:22:08 http://www.w3.org/2015/06/settlement-201506.pdf 20:22:11 http://www.w3.org/2015/06/settlement-201506.pdf 20:22:12 Settlement presentation: http://www.w3.org/2015/06/settlement-201506.pdf 20:22:31 .....inrcease competition, market makers - which is better fro users 20:22:57 ....Web Payments standards will increase the choice amoungst payment instrumenets 20:23:11 settlement is about the links between heinstruments 20:23:22 .....do we have the same instruments/ 20:23:22 me/ feeling like rocky and Ivan Drago... "He's not a machine... He's not a machine.... " :p 20:23:31 .....easy, secure, cheap 20:23:32 q? 20:23:56 Visha: Does every marekt makerahve tobe @@@ 20:24:32 ST: I am not a lawyer, ssic they aronly working on an exchange they woldhave to be a broker deaker 20:25:02 ST: It sounds great if we can have pre=ayments everywhere 20:25:16 ...lets lok at thehistory of the web where you had sios 20:25:33 ....open standards allowed the websilos to speak with each other 20:25:53 ...three evels you 20:26:23 ....how do you make money move onthe web the way that infomaton moves on the web? 20:26:36 ....not just tomake it cheaper and faster 20:27:00 ....the difference between HTTP if you duplicate it it will make it workthless 20:27:13 ....there is a regulatory challange as well 20:27:29 ...how do you feelconfiden about where the payments is going? 20:27:38 ....what do these standards loooklike 20:27:55 ...our history with ledgers we learned some interesting things 20:28:04 ...we need you input 20:28:56 AHB: Here is what we are kicking off - this is an invite for this Web Settlement Community Group - please join as we incubate 20:28:57 q+ for quick question re: session goals 20:29:26 .....the Task force inthe IG exists andwillcontinue as a liaison nbetween the IG andCG 20:29:39 ......it is the early days but are excited 20:29:43 CyrilV has joined #wpay 20:29:45 q+ 20:29:52 q+ 20:29:52 q+ dezell 20:29:57 ack manu` 20:29:57 manu`, you wanted to ask about settlement next steps - who else is going to participate in the group? when will we see a spec proposal? does it run in parallel? 20:30:45 MS: Thenext steps are aCG. Who is going to participate. I am a huge fan and happy that Rippleis so heavil involved. We need other large orgs 20:31:00 .....the old fashioned community 20:31:01 q+ 20:31:21 ...I think you need multiple players from those using ledgers 20:31:50 ...getting thise flksinvolved - or just propose something - and then you will draw folks out of the woodwork tocorrect you 20:32:25 q+ to mention Primavera's cryptoledgers group. 20:32:34 ST: Bitcoiners - we want more but I do not want to be Bitcoun only - we want to do it the web way 20:32:39 Arjun_ has joined #wpay 20:32:45 q+ 20:32:47 ES: We want to workwithBanks andthe Fe and others 20:32:50 Kristy has joined #wpay 20:33:06 ack nick 20:33:06 nick, you wanted to discuss quick question re: session goals 20:33:11 ....wewnat to take wgat FinServ does today adtaei on to theweb' 20:33:26 Nick: I think Apple would be interested in this. 20:33:52 ES: Recruiting 20:34:43 Nick: But we probably need to get the right expertise / org on our part. Will see if anybody is interested in participating on our end. 20:34:56 q+ 20:34:56 Cyrl: I think this is very interesting. New settlement. It is part of our discussion. Tey could levegr the difrrence between the payment system - based onthe card scheme 20:35:01 q+ 20:35:07 ....solutions will not be exactly the same 20:35:27 ...we cant imagine to have payment andsettlement to not be interoperable 20:35:43 .....we will participate if we can 20:36:14 AHB: These things are linked but different - a bottom up way. What is a newway todo the rails? 20:36:32 .....we have to consider the existing system 20:36:46 .....we wll figure it out along the way 20:36:48 q+ jeff 20:37:02 ST: That is one of theadvantaes of web payments 20:37:26 ....one reason our securityisso pooristhatit was not built onthe web 20:37:30 ack mountie 20:37:38 q- CyrilV 20:38:06 Mountie; There is a mission part for the accouningsystems or the settlement - this is important - theentities a traitional shift 20:38:29 ....we need sme additionalchannels, Bitcoin, inetrchannel, intercountry 20:38:50 ST: I agree that i why we are spinning off to a CG> 20:38:52 q+ 20:38:53 q+ to say that it's not out of scope 20:39:30 Dave E:I want tomodify - since we ar a steering committee - it SEEMS out of scope - but I think that it willend up being quite interesting andreevant. 20:39:35 +1 to what dezell is saying - approach is good - do it in a CG now, then take it back to WG. 20:39:45 ...we need people who want to workonthsi to come to the W3C 20:40:03 ....The CG is a good way to bringthesepeplon 20:40:38 q- 20:40:51 AHB: I agree with Mountie becasue he said that Bitoin can be added even if it fades away - it show that there ar options. her are alternative ways 20:41:06 ...that is awesome. The CG peoplelet meknow if you want to be involved 20:41:08 q+ 20:41:20 Arjun has joined #wpay 20:41:31 ...we want settlement participants, usually banks to paricipate 20:41:56 s/paricipate/participate 20:42:03 s/accouningsystems/accounting systems/ 20:42:07 s/peoplelet meknow/people let me know/ 20:42:16 FYI: http://www.w3.org/2015/06/settlement-201506.pdf 20:42:35 ack adamm 20:42:39 q- dezell 20:42:57 Adam: It talks about Int money keys - from silos to modern payments systems - I anot sure what % of we paymets happen in that way - usually withmy card 20:42:59 s/andsettlement/and settlement/ 20:43:10 ....which is a lot less trouble - thatis a specific use case. 20:43:15 s/theentities/the entities/ 20:43:19 s/becasue/because 20:43:19 s/paymets/payments 20:43:22 ...what is theproblemthat this is suposed yo solve 20:43:32 s/theproblemthat/the problem that/ 20:43:46 s/yo/to/ 20:44:04 ST You make a payment it seems to go through - the card networgoes to the bank andthen onwil go to the s=cental banks andit happenes asynchronously 20:44:12 s/thatis/that is/ 20:44:19 s/networgoes/network goes/ 20:44:23 ......clearing houses andfinally thepayment is seetled 20:44:26 s/andthen/and then/ 20:44:28 s/becasue/because/ 20:44:28 s/paymets/payments/ 20:44:34 s/andfinally/and finally/ 20:44:42 s/thepayment/the payment/ 20:44:48 s/paricipate/participate/ 20:45:17 ....you cansee international payment a hundred timeslower that today...then youwillseelarger volumn 20:45:21 s/bringthesepeplon/bring these people on/ 20:45:25 s/cansee/can see 20:45:43 s/timeslower/times slower/ 20:45:57 s/youwillseelarger volumn/you will see lager volume/ 20:45:58 ...Google did this spoof og Utube you watch TV fromyour Utube - becasue the transaction model is too expensive 20:46:08 ...we do not have truly fluid payments 20:46:30 q? 20:46:31 s/og Utube/of Youtube/ 20:46:42 Cyril: Be careful when you say that. Settlement or SWIF is less that 4% of the value chain 20:46:43 s/fromyour/from your/ 20:46:56 q? 20:46:57 ST: At the same toime we are able toreduce thecosts by 90% 20:47:10 s/toime/time/ 20:47:15 s/SWIF/SWIFT/ 20:47:23 s/toreduce thecosts/to reduce the costs/ 20:47:38 Cyril: SWIF is connected to allof the banks, part of the value they have invested formay years. Itis not up to date - butit is currently connectec 20:48:01 s/alllof/all of/ 20:48:05 ....you are less expensive, if you are not connected 20:48:10 s/formay/for many/ 20:48:12 s/SWIF/SWIFT/ 20:48:26 s/itis/it is/ 20:48:28 Cyril: Bitcond kicks you @ss notonthe payment system, we do not care 20:48:52 ...it is very interesting.Take care withwhatis the weapoint 20:48:58 s/butit/but it/ 20:49:10 David J: ther e are geographicadifferences inthis 20:49:18 s/Bitcond/Bitcoin/ 20:49:34 s/withwhatis/with what is/ 20:49:54 s/ther e/there/ 20:50:00 ES: One reason why wewant to bring this to W3C. It is not about just creating another networks. Itisabout usingweb standars forinteroperability that people canadopt 20:50:17 ack manu` 20:50:17 manu`, you wanted to mention Primavera's cryptoledgers group. and to say that it's not out of scope 20:50:19 s/geographicdifferences inthis/geographic differences in this/ 20:50:32 q+ 20:50:32 ST: On the web you just have to connect to an ISP - not the ISP 20:50:39 s/wewant/we want/ 20:50:49 s/Itisabout/It is about/ 20:51:04 Manu: Primavera Phillipi is trying to bring the Bitcoin group togther onledgers which is very inteesting 20:51:08 s/usingweb/using web/ 20:51:21 s/standars/standards/ 20:51:43 Karen has joined #wpay 20:51:48 q+ dezell re faster payments 20:51:51 Q+ 20:51:53 ST: Working withCrypt legdger is good but it is not about Bitcoin it is about standardizing how acheive settlement via the web 20:52:16 s/forinteroperability/for interoperability/ 20:52:32 s/canadopt/can adopt/ 20:52:34 q? 20:52:50 Manu: second point, this is none of the most exciting future looking things - thiis inscope and I hope that t comes sooner rathe than later 20:52:51 s/withCrypt/with Crypt/ 20:53:08 s/legdger/ledger/ 20:53:15 ES: this is not in the critical pathfor webpayments, but it is important 20:53:26 jeff has joined #wpay 20:53:39 s/thiis inscope/this is in scope/ 20:53:54 Vish: There is a rile that SWIF has here andthat is inthe movement ofmoney 20:54:06 s/pathfor/path for/ 20:54:22 ....you are not solvingthe problemof why poeple put money inthe bank and not on my phone. 20:54:26 +1 20:54:30 s/andthat/and that/ 20:54:32 -1 20:54:36 s/solvingthe/solving the/ 20:54:41 s/problemof/problem of/ 20:54:42 @Ryladog that's Arjun not Vish :) 20:54:45 s/inthe/in the/ 20:54:54 s/Vish:/Arjun:/ 20:55:10 s/SWIF/SWIFT/ 20:55:11 ...I think this is ance path buy tying it to a web payment standards in maybe not agood idea. Settlement has tohappenthrough a central banks 20:55:12 s/ofmoney/of money/ 20:55:28 agree its not a technology problem 20:55:34 ack Arjun 20:55:34 q? 20:55:41 s/agood/a good/ 20:55:59 s/tohappenthrough/to happen through/ 20:56:04 .ST:I thinkwe completely agree with that. Whenyou are building standards yu are usualyy not thinking about replacing anything else- but rather improvomhthe landscape 20:56:12 q+ 20:56:16 s/whenyou/when you/ 20:56:20 Dave E: the que willclosein 15 seconds 20:56:21 s/yu/you/ 20:56:31 zakim, close queue 20:56:31 ok, manu`, the speaker queue is closed 20:56:33 s/usualyy/usually/ 20:56:56 SE:Why do you thing Settlemnt has to happen only through a central bank? 20:57:07 dont agree that all payments need to traverse central banks, or that its even desirable 20:57:21 s/improvomhthe/improving the/ 20:57:53 Vish:Lets say I send am moneygram though Western Union which is very expensive - 20:58:01 i fear we are confusing money transfer with web payment 20:58:08 s/Vish:/Arjun:/ 20:58:36 adamm, I think they acknowledged that this is a distinct subject 20:59:01 ES: Let say you are Well Fargo - lets say you correlate twopaymenst though two ledgers - you can have a settled payment without any money owedwithout goingthroughacentralbank 20:59:12 ack next 20:59:23 Add this to HOTTOPICS 20:59:24 s/twopaymenst/two payments/ 20:59:31 therealvish: @@ 20:59:38 s/owedwithout/owed without/ 20:59:59 s/goingthroughacentralbank/going through a central bank/ 21:00:18 Vish:Intrbank settlements between centralbanks isone of the mostcomplicated transactions- whatdo you think about that 21:00:40 ...once you introduce an iefficiency you mayhave unintended consequences 21:00:46 s/Intrbank/Intrabank/ 21:00:52 ....finallyI want to hear fromtheFedonthis.... 21:00:56 s/centralbanks/central banks/ 21:01:00 s/isone/is one/ 21:01:03 +1 21:01:08 s/mostcomplicated/most complicated/ 21:01:14 s/whatdo/what do/ 21:01:19 q? 21:01:28 zakim, close queue 21:01:28 ok, wseltzer, the speaker queue is closed 21:01:37 s/iefficiency/inefficiency/ 21:01:47 ES: We are not FX dealers - we re trying to bring togther the participants 21:02:29 .....I would want the bans to think about the volumn story there are decently highmargins onsomepayments 21:02:38 Magda has joined #wpay 21:02:41 s/bans/banks/ 21:02:54 s/volumn/volume/ 21:02:56 ST: Economists as soon as settlement gets quicker your velocty increases 21:03:02 s/highmargins/high margins/ 21:03:09 s/onsomepayments/on some payments/ 21:03:10 .....there are risk sides to it 21:03:26 David: Be careful not to push too hard 21:03:36 q? 21:03:41 q- dezell 21:03:41 ST: We have been incubaing this 21:03:51 s/incubaing/incubating/ 21:04:07 ack j 21:04:56 Jeff: Inresting, thakyou. A CG is good place to takeit further. When will it be ready to bring it back? Interoperaility, as you develop the concepts 21:05:11 .....we would want to see a coupe of implementations of ths 21:05:14 q- 21:05:22 ack padler 21:05:23 ES: Our CTO wants us to implement this 21:05:27 s/inresting/interesting/ 21:05:39 s/thakyou/thank you/ 21:05:48 s/takeit/take it/ 21:06:15 s/Interoperaility/Interoperability/ 21:06:23 s/coupe/couple/ 21:06:45 Pat: I think this is important. Central banksare not going away. Many value networks - how do we glue them together? Internationally thepayment process becomesvery hard 21:06:59 s/banksare/banks are/ 21:07:02 ...therefore ithinkthere is alot of value inexploring ways to do this 21:07:12 s/thepayment/the payment/ 21:07:23 s/becomesvery/becomes very/ 21:07:34 s/ithinkthere/I think there/ 21:07:40 s/alot/a lot/ 21:07:49 s/inexploring/in exploring/ 21:07:50 ....they can bediffereent andstillenable the glue between. Not replace thosenetowrks but be able to communicate between those networks 21:08:04 .....we dont want this to come back in too late 21:08:12 s/bediffereent/be different/ 21:08:20 q? 21:08:24 s/andstillenable/and still enable/ 21:08:35 ....we can move vlaue more effiiently - we improve the stability of the system - more fluidly exchanged 21:08:38 = 21:08:48 +1 21:08:50 s/thosenetowrks/those networks/ 21:08:52 q? 21:09:04 +1 to Pat 21:09:53 Move Value = Move Security = kyc/aml 21:10:00 s/vlaue/value/ 21:10:03 Eric: I am going to put this in IRC myself. AS you start moving infomation between networks thanyour security andother requirements go up 21:10:08 Erik: As value transitions from one settlement network to the next so does the KYC, AML, security requirements, privacy, etc. 21:10:17 s/thanyour/than your/ 21:10:27 Erik: Framework must address protection of the data itself. A payment and information networks consists of many components—computers, communication channels, software, and users—each subject to attack and requiring defense. The weakness of each component will vary, and attackers will strike vulnerabilities with the highest expected payoff. 21:10:41 s/andother/and other/ 21:10:46 Erik: Engineers who protect these components make judgements about their vulnerability and prioritize each component to determine which weakness to correct. These assessments are difficult, costly, and uncertain, and some weaknesses will likely remain due to undetected vulnerabilities or imprecise assessments (such as underestimates of potential damages). 21:10:49 ES: Security is something we are very nterested in this. Just becasue itis hard doesnt mean we should address it 21:10:51 ack next 21:10:56 ack mountie 21:11:09 Erik: Engineers cant protect all the components all the time so we must work on protecting the underlying data. This requires a data protection framework that spans the UI to the very data storage. A proper framework will allow the web/internet to be used as the payment pipes. 21:11:27 Erik: Without such a data protection framework it will be impossible to safely use the web/internet because of the uncertainty of security of each network node a transaction goes through. 21:11:43 Mountie; Less dependecne on central bank -,maybe we can xchange the data via the web and use clearing houses 21:11:49 Erik: Without a proper framework the Engineers will protect a handful of weak network links but not all of them. Over time, the set of weak links will change. A mild amount of uncertainty can lead to additional protection of weaker links where expected losses are high and countermeasures are justified. On the other hand, high uncertainty can lead to no protection: the defender may not know which link is weakest and thus leave all links unprotected. 21:11:50 ack aylcw3c 21:12:03 s/dependecne/dependency/ 21:12:25 Arie; I think Ripple has a great vision. I echo the Fed. Thing this and that - instead of this or that 21:13:18 ....the importance of that you are alsworkingon identity at a company level- so tey dovetail 21:13:47 ST: the state that we feel we are at is that we feel that more thanour company is need to build this 21:13:47 +1 to the notion of "This AND That" 21:13:52 Arjun has joined #wpay 21:13:53 s/alsworkingon/also working on/ 21:14:19 s/thanour/than our/ 21:14:31 David E: I am thinking - the glossary is important - we ansupplement it tomorrow 21:14:36 Topic: Glossary 21:14:37 TOPIC: Glossary 21:15:36 Glossary Fundamentals (Evert Fekkes and Adrian Hope-Bailie) 21:16:06 EF:We have beensetting thatup where we want toocate the key terminology as a single point of truth 21:16:20 ....we came to analphabetal list of terms 21:16:31 s/beensetting/been setting/ 21:16:38 https://www.w3.org/Payments/IG/wiki/Glossary is being projected 21:16:39 s/thatup/that up/ 21:16:47 ...I found three terms for credintial 21:17:03 s/toocate/to locate/ 21:17:08 ...they hinkcredintialsarent reuiqired fropaymnts as of this year 21:17:41 s/analphabetal/an alphabetical/ 21:17:43 ....I do not expect that people are ooking at this often 21:17:56 ....Four Corner Model 21:18:08 ...and extended 4 corner model 21:18:18 s/hinkcredintialsarent/think credentials aren't/ 21:18:40 ....itis correctly linked 21:18:47 s/fropaymnts/for payments/ 21:19:01 q+ to ask about 4 corner model and payment ecosystem picture 21:19:08 zakim, open queue 21:19:08 ok, jeff, the speaker queue is open 21:19:09 zakim, open the queue 21:19:10 ok, manu`, the speaker queue is open 21:19:13 ....glossary reference which is smaller - this is only terms fromthe Use cases document 21:19:23 q+ to ask about 4 corner model and payment ecosystem picture 21:19:40 evan_schwartz has joined #wpay 21:19:49 .....there is merit ingetting competing definiions in place to decide on clear definitions 21:20:26 ....Iformatting exersize 21:20:35 ....many different documents 21:20:38 s/ingetting/in getting/ 21:20:54 ...we have tried automatically linking butwehave not yetacheived this 21:21:07 s/butwehave/but we have/ 21:21:28 ...please let us know about terms that need to be added. We do want it to be as short as possible 21:21:30 s/yetacheived/yet achieved/ 21:21:37 +1 for a small and concise glossary 21:21:37 q? 21:21:47 q+ 21:21:56 Q= 21:21:59 Q+ 21:22:00 q+ to apologize for automatic inclusion of glossary in specs 21:22:00 ....we do NOT want thousands of terms. The want the kernal.nuggets of what is required to execute the payments 21:22:01 ack jeff 21:22:01 jeff, you wanted to ask about 4 corner model and payment ecosystem picture 21:22:36 q+ to agree that glossary should be as small as possible 21:22:54 q+ to speak in favor of relationships to other documents. 21:22:59 adamm has joined #wpay 21:23:00 Jeff: I thinkit is def of trms but also thefundamentalpictures thathelp us to undertsnad the terms and their relaionships 21:23:21 s/thinkit/think it/ 21:23:24 s/thefundamentalpictures/the fundamental pictures/ 21:23:39 Joerg: I think the glossary will help us come up with a specifc term- and collecting may never end 21:23:40 s/thefundamentapictures/the fundamental pictures/ 21:23:59 s/thathelp/that help/ 21:24:07 ....We want to differentiate why we used it this way 21:24:36 q+ 21:24:38 Everett: Gettingto agenrictermis a two step process 21:24:43 ack ay 21:24:47 ack jh 21:25:32 Aria: Interoperabilty when wedefine it forweb payments - we should say that it is at least a derivative 21:25:43 s/Everett:/Evert:/ 21:25:51 ack manu` 21:25:51 manu`, you wanted to apologize for automatic inclusion of glossary in specs and to agree that glossary should be as small as possible and to speak in favor of relationships to 21:25:54 ... other documents. 21:25:54 EF: That is a challenge. It is up to the group to be critical 21:25:55 s/Gettingto/Getting to/ 21:26:00 ack m 21:26:21 s/wedefine/we define/ 21:26:26 s/forweb/for web/ 21:26:36 Manu: I have not yet been able to do the Glossary inclusion work...hopefully somebody can help mefinish this off 21:26:50 ...Iagree thatthe glssary should beas short as possible 21:26:50 s/mefinish/me finish/ 21:27:01 s/Iagree/I agree/ 21:27:10 s/thatthe/that the/ 21:27:18 s/beas/be as/ 21:27:24 .....compact thati included inall thedocuments automatically thatwillbegood. A doen product 21:27:38 ack cy 21:27:43 s/inall/in all/ 21:27:52 zakim, close queue 21:27:52 ok, manu`, the speaker queue is closed 21:27:56 s/thedocuments/the documents/ 21:28:03 Cyril: This morning we had a slice of the pie from Pat - the diagram - I think we have to be consistant. 21:28:09 s/thatwillbegood/that will be good/ 21:28:52 ...My suggestionwas more to explain it inthe context of the payment system. You put all of the actors. Add the flows and responsibilities to the Glossary to understanding 21:29:07 q? 21:29:14 EF: Maybe this could be a breakout 21:29:39 payment 21:29:55 s/suggestionwas/suggestion was/ 21:30:05 s/inthe/in the/ 21:30:14 David J: Let get the word 'payment' defined 21:30:42 rrsagent, make minutes 21:30:42 I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2015/06/16-wpay-minutes.html wseltzer 21:31:31 David E: Tomorrow we start out with Mark. The next topic tomorrow is the breakout sessions. We will have several things to complete there 21:31:40 i|manu: [presenting]|scribenick: AdrianHB 21:32:01 i|schutzer: majority|scribenick: wseltzer 21:32:53 David: Settlement. What will be time consuming = please come in ready to go. Talk about it tonight. In the afternoon, We want to turmnthe corner after those sessions 21:33:09 rrsagent, make minutes 21:33:09 I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2015/06/16-wpay-minutes.html wseltzer 21:33:25 ...we want to talk about the proposed charters 21:33:45 rrsagent, start a new log at midnight 21:33:53 ...Dinner at 6:30 at Dawat 21:34:11 yaso1 has left #wpay 21:34:15 i|laurent: talks through|scribenick: AdrianHB 21:34:22 210 E 58th St, New York, NY 10022 - Phone: (212) 355-7555 21:34:31 rrsagent, make minutes 21:34:31 I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2015/06/16-wpay-minutes.html wseltzer 21:34:58 Dipan has joined #wpay 21:35:26 mountie has joined #wpay 21:35:27 scribe: AdrianHB, dsr, m4nu, jeff, Katie_Haritos-Shea, Yaso 21:35:32 rrsagent, make minutes 21:35:32 I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2015/06/16-wpay-minutes.html wseltzer 21:35:51 scribe: wseltzer 21:36:04 present+ Many_more_than_present+d 21:36:23 rrsagent, make minutes 21:36:23 I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2015/06/16-wpay-minutes.html wseltzer 21:53:09 dsr has joined #wpay