IRC log of wpay on 2015-08-07

Timestamps are in UTC.

13:25:06 [RRSAgent]
RRSAgent has joined #wpay
13:25:06 [RRSAgent]
logging to http://www.w3.org/2015/08/07-wpay-irc
13:25:08 [Zakim]
Zakim has joined #wpay
13:25:20 [manu]
Meeting: Web Payments IG Payment Architecture Telecon
13:25:23 [manu]
rrsagent, draft minutes
13:25:23 [RRSAgent]
I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2015/08/07-wpay-minutes.html manu
13:25:59 [manu]
agenda+ Capabilities: Front Matter
13:26:18 [manu]
agenda+ Security Core
13:26:23 [manu]
agenda+ Identity and Credentials
13:26:29 [manu]
agenda+ Accounts and Settlement
13:26:42 [manu]
agenda+ Payments and Exchange
13:26:42 [manu]
agenda+ Commerce
13:28:25 [Jiangtao_jia]
Jiangtao_jia has joined #wpay
13:28:35 [Ian]
present+ Ian
13:30:18 [jheuer]
jheuer has joined #wpay
13:31:20 [manu]
present+ Pat
13:31:23 [manu]
present+ Manu
13:32:06 [DJackson]
DJackson has joined #wpay
13:32:12 [padler]
padler has joined #wpay
13:34:31 [jheuer]
present+ jheuer
13:34:41 [dezell]
present+ dezell
13:34:46 [github-bot]
github-bot has joined #wpay
13:34:46 [github-bot]
[13webpayments-ig] 15ianbjacobs pushed 1 new commit to 06gh-pages: 02https://github.com/w3c/webpayments-ig/commit/ba6ab5c90f243e0a61d86baee2aa02a7e009f4c2
13:34:46 [github-bot]
13webpayments-ig/06gh-pages 14ba6ab5c 15Ian Jacobs: Merge branch 'master' into gh-pages
13:34:47 [github-bot]
github-bot has left #wpay
13:35:46 [manu]
Present+ DavidJ
13:36:03 [manu]
Agenda: https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-webpayments-ig/2015Aug/0036.html
13:36:11 [Ryladog]
Ryladog has joined #wpay
13:37:01 [Ian]
scribe: Ian
13:37:07 [jheuer]
*tuoched the wrong button - I am back again
13:37:15 [manu]
zakim, take up agendum 1
13:37:15 [Zakim]
agendum 1. "Capabilities: Front Matter" taken up [from manu]
13:37:42 [Ian]
-> https://w3c.github.io/webpayments-ig/latest/capabilities/index.html Capabilities
13:37:55 [Ian]
Manu: I did some markup cleanup last night; should look like other docs
13:38:32 [Ian]
Note: We'll use w3c.github.io as staging for publications henceforth (but still need to confirm with sysreq)
13:38:33 [manu]
http://w3c.github.io/webpayments-ig/latest/capabilities/index.html#introduction
13:38:54 [Ian]
q+ for a quick high-level comment
13:39:04 [manu]
ack Ian
13:39:04 [Zakim]
Ian, you wanted to discuss a quick high-level comment
13:39:39 [manu]
Ian: High level comment so we are most effective over next 6 weeks on this document if this is the focus - two emphases over the next few weeks - build face-to-face agenda, and the other is the capabilities document.
13:39:47 [Ryladog]
REMINDER: to please change my affiliation from W3C Invited Expert to Knowbility
13:39:50 [manu]
Ian: I see Thu/Fri meeting being a part of that
13:40:30 [padler]
q+ to discuss framing of the document
13:40:33 [manu]
Ian: We want to bring all of this stuff into a shared picture of architecture - one way to think about working on this document is - what will help make it useful for that.
13:41:10 [manu]
Ian: If that is going to be the technical vision - we may not need to be focusing on phase 3 things, but if we really need the WG's feedback on something, let's make sure to frame things in that way.
13:41:13 [manu]
ack padler
13:41:13 [Zakim]
padler, you wanted to discuss framing of the document
13:41:21 [Ian]
pat: Thanks to Manu for editing
13:41:38 [Ian]
..the only comment to Ian's framing on the usage of the document
13:41:46 [Ian]
...I am hoping to stay away from the word "architecture"
13:41:54 [Ian]
...we are moving away from that and two a set of capabilities
13:42:03 [Ian]
...the capabilities are to provide context across WGs
13:42:24 [Ian]
...so, for example, an identity WG could see how their work would fit into the payments work.
13:42:32 [Ian]
...it is not intended to be a detailed architecture
13:42:43 [Ian]
...the document should be broader than that.
13:42:45 [Ian]
q+
13:42:55 [manu]
ack Ian
13:43:01 [github-bot]
github-bot has joined #wpay
13:43:01 [github-bot]
[13webpayments-ig] 15msporny pushed 1 new commit to 06master: 02https://github.com/w3c/webpayments-ig/commit/1f433881472d7bde48a4d5bbdd828d7ca0cace99
13:43:01 [github-bot]
13webpayments-ig/06master 141f43388 15Manu Sporny: Change Katie's affiliation to Knowability.
13:43:02 [github-bot]
github-bot has left #wpay
13:43:45 [manu]
Ian: What make the capabilities not an architecture? If there is a series of things that make payments possible - it feels close to an architecture.
13:44:08 [manu]
Ian: It's not that they describe a flow, but they do enable something to happen - don't want to spend a ton of time on this, but raised high-level point so I know how to talk about it.
13:44:10 [Ryladog]
I note that this document is using British English (eg Standardised), I think the norm for W3C docs is American English
13:45:03 [manu]
Ian: "We'll show the Working Group something - see how their work can be a part of the payments group story" - Some are bound to payments, others are bound to security and we need them to see what we need. Slightly different view of how they fit in - they're not assigned a piece of this stuff, slightly broader set of things. I can live with either.
13:45:53 [Ian]
padler: People are wondering why the IG would be discussing "architecture"; I think people think that an architecture is more detailed/technical
13:46:04 [Ian]
...so we are keeping this generally at a broad set of capabilities.
13:46:19 [Ian]
...some might touch on architecture (e.g., how does loyalty fit in)
13:46:44 [Ian]
...this is a way for us to provide overall context on capabilities and how they fit together
13:46:55 [manu]
q+ to weigh in
13:46:58 [manu]
ack manu
13:46:58 [Zakim]
manu, you wanted to weigh in
13:46:58 [Ian]
...but "architecture" has given people an impression (perhaps too narrow) of our goals for the document
13:47:11 [Ian]
manu: I think I agree with Pat on what the document's goal is.
13:47:46 [Ian]
...calling something an architecture may tend to make it too rigid. Although Web architecture is not overly rigid. But my concern for "payments architecture" it may be perceived as more rigid than what we intend.
13:47:54 [padler]
+1 to Manu's observation...
13:47:54 [Ian]
...rather, this document is a collection of things we need the system to do.
13:48:13 [Ian]
...not a full architectural discussion because it does not say in detail how the pieces fit together or specific messages that flow
13:48:16 [dezell]
q+ to talk about our narrative
13:48:41 [Ian]
...rather we can talk about capabilities as "here's what we think we need, but it's not clear to us yet how it all fits together."
13:48:44 [shepazu]
shepazu has joined #wpay
13:49:29 [Ian]
editorial: "This document describes aset" -> "This document describes a set"
13:49:33 [manu]
ack dezell
13:49:33 [Zakim]
dezell, you wanted to talk about our narrative
13:49:45 [Ian]
[IJ thinks we may need a bit more explanation of the document up front; no proposal yet]
13:50:26 [Ian]
dezell: Pretty much agree with Manu
13:50:34 [Ryladog]
q+
13:50:52 [manu]
q+ to wonder if we can table the broader discussion and think about it for the next week or so.
13:50:52 [padler]
q+ to talk about framing current work in the sections of the document
13:50:57 [Ian]
...I think the capabilities doc is a useful tool the way we are developing it.
13:50:57 [manu]
ack Ryladog
13:52:34 [manu]
ack manu
13:52:34 [Zakim]
manu, you wanted to wonder if we can table the broader discussion and think about it for the next week or so.
13:52:38 [Ian]
Ryladog: Want to avoid giving people impression things are set in stone.
13:53:01 [Ian]
Manu: We don't yet have an architecture in mind.
13:53:40 [Ian]
http://www.w3.org/2001/07/19-tag
13:54:53 [manu]
q+ to respond to TAG.
13:55:14 [manu]
q-
13:55:24 [manu]
ack padler
13:55:24 [Zakim]
padler, you wanted to talk about framing current work in the sections of the document
13:55:37 [Ian]
Ian: I wanted to know what we are trying to accomplish so I know how to contribute over the next 6 weeks
13:55:41 [manu]
Ian: Ok, I think I have what I need to be able to contribute to the document.
13:56:11 [Ian]
padler: I think the doc also highlights the work going on in this space
13:56:53 [Ian]
..and thus serves as a map so people don't overlap
13:56:56 [padler]
http://www.w3.org/2004/10/27-tag-charter.html
13:57:43 [manu]
q+ to move discussion back to document
13:58:02 [Ian]
padler: Our goal is in some sense to give people a high-level picture.
13:58:21 [manu]
ack manu
13:58:21 [Zakim]
manu, you wanted to move discussion back to document
13:58:21 [Ian]
...stewardship role of the IG; continuous context
13:58:47 [manu]
Ian: We should reflect this understanding in the document - the document needs more framing.
13:58:59 [padler]
+1 to updating goals of the document..
13:59:14 [padler]
pat can volunteer to take the intro...
13:59:14 [Ian]
Manu: Who wants to write the intro?
13:59:17 [manu]
http://w3c.github.io/webpayments-ig/latest/capabilities/index.html#introduction
13:59:26 [Ian]
Action: Pat to write the intro to the capabilities doc
13:59:26 [trackbot]
Error finding 'Pat'. You can review and register nicknames at <http://www.w3.org/Payments/IG/track/users>.
13:59:31 [Ian]
Action: paler to write the intro to the capabilities doc
13:59:31 [trackbot]
Error finding 'paler'. You can review and register nicknames at <http://www.w3.org/Payments/IG/track/users>.
13:59:36 [Ian]
Action: padler to write the intro to the capabilities doc
13:59:36 [trackbot]
Created ACTION-131 - Write the intro to the capabilities doc [on Patrick Adler - due 2015-08-14].
14:00:12 [Ian]
(IJ notes that we should discuss updating the glossary AFTER the AC review, since we might make changes based on AC review)
14:00:17 [manu]
http://w3c.github.io/webpayments-ig/latest/capabilities/index.html#overview-of-capabilities
14:00:45 [Ian]
Manu: It's not clear in 3 what the big lists ("Capabilities") are doing.
14:01:56 [Ian]
padler: I think the front matter of section 3 needs to say "payments is a big space. so the IG has attempted to simplify and compartmentalize capabilities"
14:02:11 [Ian]
...there used to be a simple diagram
14:02:46 [Ian]
...agree that the long Capabilities lists hit people with a lot (and too soon)
14:03:40 [manu]
Ian: This seems like a good exercise to test the thinking - tying the goals back to the use cases - does our model hold - do all these capability blocks go somewhere?
14:04:03 [manu]
Ian: Like we discussed before, you can go one way or the other - each capability block says what group it belongs to - for comms it might not be necessary.
14:04:58 [Ian]
[Pat and Manu will take a stab at cleaning this up]
14:05:38 [manu]
Ian: I propose we use the definition from the charter and put it in the terminology section and modify the definition based on what's there.
14:05:47 [padler]
q?
14:06:04 [padler]
q+
14:06:06 [Ian]
q+
14:06:10 [manu]
ack padler
14:06:47 [Ian]
padler: feels to me like we need to finish the capabilities section first.
14:07:01 [Ian]
...if we are still focusing on digital wallets, then we might find we need to define them
14:07:30 [manu]
ack Ian
14:07:30 [Ian]
..more thought needs to go into how to place wallets in the doc
14:08:04 [manu]
Ian: I'm looking at section 4 and not sure I understand its role in the document. I understand 3, here's a small set of groupings that cover everything.
14:08:20 [manu]
Ian: Then 5 says - now that you have the groupings, we can go into more detail - I get that.
14:08:29 [manu]
Ian: But inbetween, there is this interaction wheel, it doesn't make sense there.
14:08:55 [manu]
Ian: The particular diagramming approach may be useful (I don't know yet) as the super clear way to describe flows. I don't think it is conveying anything useful yet between 3 and 5.
14:08:57 [DJackson]
+1, this section belongs in an architecture or process flow section
14:09:26 [manu]
Ian: One possibility is - we can't do 5 unless we've explicitly said who the parties are - because 5 depends so heavily on it - what their responsibilities are are critical to understanding capabilities.
14:09:41 [manu]
Ian: It feels much closer to flow, which we said is not a key part of capabilities, it feels out of place here.
14:09:46 [DJackson]
q+
14:09:46 [manu]
manu: +1 to Ian.
14:09:49 [manu]
ack DJackson
14:10:03 [Ian]
DJackson: I agree with Ian. Seems like it is about flow or architecture.
14:10:08 [manu]
DJackson: I agree, it does seem out of context - it belongs in a section on flow.
14:10:09 [manu]
q+
14:10:20 [manu]
DJackson: If you are defining the entities - they're defined elsewhere in the document.
14:11:08 [Ian]
padler: There are a number of scenarios where the whole set of interactions happens very quickly (matter of seconds or minutes)
14:11:16 [Ian]
...and things can be described in a single flow.
14:11:31 [Ian]
...but there are other scenarios where the interactions last much longer, especially when you introduce commerce elements
14:11:45 [Ian]
...such as when a user walks into a store and their mobile device is recognized by the store's system and they receive offers on the phone
14:12:03 [Ian]
...they may or may not stay in the store and make a payment....this is part of the "offer" phase.
14:12:25 [Ian]
...but there are other cases with existing offers (e.g., coupon I previously got) and I'm leveraging it now when I go online to use that coupon that I had received.
14:12:39 [Ian]
...so the purpose of these circles was intended to depict that variety of flows
14:12:47 [Ian]
...multiparty interactions
14:13:03 [Ian]
q+
14:13:07 [manu]
ack manu
14:13:30 [Ian]
padler: I also agree with Ian that doesn't fit in this context.
14:13:34 [Ian]
manu: Three issues:
14:13:44 [Ian]
...1) seems out of place (thought it didn't seem that way before)
14:13:53 [padler]
+1 to readability...
14:13:56 [Ian]
...2) Images are big and hard to understand them
14:14:04 [Ian]
...want to be able to take in the picture all at once
14:14:07 [padler]
originally it was a bunch of images on one line..
14:14:33 [Ian]
...3) Payments stuff is unique....other specs talk about protocols and you don't usually think of message transactions outside of, say client/server interactions
14:14:43 [padler]
Boleto use case is a really good example of this..
14:14:57 [Ian]
q+ to propose an approach
14:15:08 [Ian]
....4) Once we start talking about flow we are getting into architecture.
14:15:30 [Ian]
...so I think we may want to park it elsewhere.
14:15:58 [manu]
ack Ian
14:15:58 [Zakim]
Ian, you wanted to propose an approach
14:16:09 [manu]
Ian: I have a counter proposal / extension
14:16:14 [Ian]
http://www.w3.org/TR/2015/WD-web-payments-use-cases-20150416/#additional-examples-of-the-payment-phases
14:16:32 [manu]
Ian: We have payment phases - these diagrams might usefully augment the use cases document.
14:17:05 [manu]
Ian: I could see these interaction wheels in the use cases document.
14:17:15 [manu]
Ian: So, that seems to be at the same conceptual level
14:17:40 [manu]
Ian: I don't know - maybe we don't talk about financial institutions - feels closer to those descriptions than the ones in the capabilities documents.
14:17:53 [manu]
Ian: Maybe we need to pair them more with use cases
14:17:58 [padler]
q+ to suggest that it may be framing of the title too..
14:18:00 [manu]
manu: +1 to pairing them w/ use cases.
14:18:12 [dezell]
+1 to pairin w use cases
14:18:27 [manu]
manu: -1 for volunteering to do that :P
14:18:34 [manu]
ack padler
14:18:34 [Zakim]
padler, you wanted to suggest that it may be framing of the title too..
14:18:41 [Ian]
[IJ thinks it's too low-level for use cases, but it's closer]
14:19:14 [Ian]
padler: I agree that we need to change the section. I do think that the way Manu was describing it, and the discussion around how payments broadly are a series of sequential, asynchronous interactions.
14:19:21 [Ian]
...would be good to have some examples somewhere in the document.
14:19:36 [Ian]
(I still think that we don't need those to talk about ***capabilities***)
14:19:48 [Ian]
padler: Payments can be expressed as a series of interactions among parties
14:20:09 [Ian]
...capabilities should be expressed as interaction between two parties
14:20:35 [Ian]
...so it will be important to talk about identity between payer/payee and that will be different from what identity means between other parties.
14:20:53 [Ian]
IJ: Isn't that already inherent in 5?
14:21:11 [Ian]
padler: We have tried to do that.
14:21:56 [Ian]
q+
14:22:03 [manu]
ack Ian
14:22:19 [manu]
Ian: My proposal - let's remove diagrams for now - when we talk about these things, it's good to be clear about who is doing what.
14:22:31 [manu]
Ian: The beginning of section 5 should say a word about the rest of section 5 - series of bullets
14:22:35 [padler]
+1 to including in section 5...
14:23:05 [padler]
parties of the interaction would be more helpful..
14:23:20 [manu]
Ian: Where possible we try to define clearly - when we talk about an interaction, we try to define who the parties to a transaction are. We want to mention what we think is relevant technology. That list is likely to change over time. We also think that you shouldn't infer that the fact that we talk about something in one capability that it must be done in the same way elsewhere.
14:23:41 [manu]
q+ to cover rest of editorial work.
14:23:57 [manu]
Ian: I'd rather do this as a lightweight set of annotations at first.
14:24:29 [manu]
Ian: I do think saying, as a bullet point, we describe transactions as clearly identifying the parties - but they are mixing up flow and use cases with the mere fact of identifying parties in the transaction.
14:24:36 [manu]
Ian: Chuck them and create an intro.
14:24:38 [Ian]
q?
14:24:38 [Ian]
ack m
14:24:39 [Zakim]
manu, you wanted to cover rest of editorial work.
14:24:46 [Ian]
manu: Lots to cover still!
14:24:49 [Ian]
...here's my summary
14:24:51 [manu]
* 5.1 Security Core
14:24:51 [manu]
* Write introduction
14:24:51 [manu]
* Write key concepts
14:24:51 [manu]
* 5.2 Identity and Credentials
14:24:52 [manu]
* Write introduction
14:24:53 [manu]
* Write key concepts
14:24:54 [manu]
* 5.3 Accounts and Settlement
14:24:56 [manu]
* Write entire section
14:24:58 [manu]
* 5.4 Payments and Exchange
14:25:00 [manu]
* Write introduction
14:25:02 [manu]
* Write key concepts
14:25:04 [manu]
* 5.5 Commerce
14:25:06 [manu]
* Write introductions for offers, discounts, coupons, invoices,
14:25:08 [manu]
receipts, loyalty
14:25:12 [manu]
* Write key concepts
14:25:17 [Ian]
Manu: In each section we are missing introductory material and key concepts
14:25:31 [Ian]
...in some cases (e.g., accounts and settlements) it's a big section and nothing's there yet
14:25:42 [Ian]
(Maybe Adrian would be best person to work on that)
14:25:54 [padler]
q+ to ask if the v2 of the capabilities sections were updated..
14:25:58 [Ian]
...we need volunteers to divid and conquer
14:26:00 [Ian]
ack padler
14:26:00 [Zakim]
padler, you wanted to ask if the v2 of the capabilities sections were updated..
14:26:01 [manu]
ack padler
14:26:19 [Ian]
padler: I need also to review the groups themselves which we updated after the June meeting.
14:26:21 [manu]
padler: I need to go back and enhance - coming out of June F2F - we updated capabilities groups, not certain those didn't get back into the document.
14:28:26 [Ian]
Manu: I can do identity.
14:28:36 [Ian]
ACTION: dezell to write introduction to "commerce" section
14:28:36 [trackbot]
Created ACTION-132 - Write introduction to "commerce" section [on David Ezell - due 2015-08-14].
14:28:51 [Ian]
ACTION: Manu to write identity/credentials intro to capabilities document
14:28:51 [trackbot]
Created ACTION-133 - Write identity/credentials intro to capabilities document [on Manu Sporny - due 2015-08-14].
14:28:56 [padler]
here's the latest on the groupings... https://www.w3.org/Payments/IG/wiki/UpdatedCapabilityGroups
14:29:01 [Ian]
ACTION: Manu to write security core intro to capabilities document
14:29:01 [trackbot]
Created ACTION-134 - Write security core intro to capabilities document [on Manu Sporny - due 2015-08-14].
14:30:31 [Ian]
rrsagent, make minutes
14:30:31 [RRSAgent]
I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2015/08/07-wpay-minutes.html Ian
14:30:35 [Ian]
rrsagent, set logs member
14:31:30 [manu]
rrsagent, draft minutes
14:31:30 [RRSAgent]
I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2015/08/07-wpay-minutes.html manu
14:31:44 [manu]
rrsagent, make logs public
14:31:55 [manu]
rrsagent, draft minutes
14:31:55 [RRSAgent]
I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2015/08/07-wpay-minutes.html manu
14:32:29 [manu]
Chair: Everyone!
14:32:37 [manu]
Present+ Katie
14:33:39 [manu]
i/It's not clear in 3 what/Topic: Capabilities in Context/
14:34:48 [manu]
i/Lots to cover still/Topic: Detail sections/
14:34:51 [manu]
rrsagent, draft minutes
14:34:51 [RRSAgent]
I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2015/08/07-wpay-minutes.html manu
14:52:01 [dbaron]
dbaron has joined #wpay
16:00:37 [dsr]
dsr has joined #wpay
18:26:21 [yaso]
yaso has joined #wpay
19:17:51 [dbaron]
dbaron has joined #wpay