Web Payments Interest Group Teleconference
04 Mar 2015

<scribe> scribe: Ian

Review progress on getting group goals into the wiki

https://www.w3.org/Payments/IG/wiki/ExecSummary

<manu> Ian: I started creating some introductory text... Chaals modified it

<manu> Ian: I'm planning on doing more work on it by tomorrow afternoon. I don't know if it's too soon to start to get people to do +1s for the points - should probably wait a few more days.

<manu> Ian: I'd like to see if we can get group buy-in on those high-level goals. It would help us create a communications piece we'd all find useful.

<manu> Ian: Would like to have another day, work with Chaals a bit more, get statements of support after that.

<manu> Katie: I feel strongly about stolen card - should I re-send that / re-state it?

<manu> Ian: Great question - I was planning to read comments - you can take up the pen directly in the wiki and change them - or sign them w/ your name. Or send them to mailing list - send concrete text.

<manu> Ian: This is likely to be an evolving document - living document because our priorities are going to evolve over time. We should be able to say "we like the current state" and shop that around.

<manu> Ian: Hoping for convergence in the next week or two for a first cut.

Manu: What form will this take?
... FPWD? What form?

<manu> Ian: The comms task force has not discussed that explicitly. It feels like a FPWD on tech reports page may not be the best approach.

<Zakim> -1, you wanted to comment on wiki - +1 on group page -1 on blog post

<Zakim> manu, you wanted to say -1 on wiki - +1 on group page -1 on blog post

Manu: -1 to wiki (not pro enough). Also -1 to blog post (not endorsed enough). +1 to a group page

<manu> +1 to just creating a Wordpress page and publishing it there

<dezell> +1 to creating blog post and linking from sidebar

<manu> I want a link that we can share w/ people that will update as the groups position evolves.

<manu> Just to be clear -1 to blog post +1 to wordpress page (the latter looks more "official")

<scribe> ACTION: Ian to work with Charles to refine text, propose draft for group support, then move to a group page on w3.org/Payments/IG/.... [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2015/03/04-wpay-minutes.html#action02]

<trackbot> Created ACTION-73 - Work with charles to refine text, propose draft for group support, then move to a group page on w3.org/payments/ig/.... [on Ian Jacobs - due 2015-03-11].

Use cases

Manu: Ian working on framework and a single narrative (for comms purposes).
... work is proceeding (not as quickly as we'd like)
... but I think we are seeing improvements

<manu> Ian: Just chatted w/ Dave Raggett before the call - one of the things that could help move us along is to split out pieces

http://www.w3.org/2015/02/wpay-sample.html

<manu> Ian: Starting to articulate a vision for different deliverables - most important deliverable right now is use cases document - it can be simplified - Dave Raggett sent an email earlier today to suggest a way to further simplify the use cases. Really focuses on situations we want to address.

<manu> Ian: Another effort to derive requirements from that - details descriptions of back-end processing, pre/post conditions - people have been saying "I want to make sure we cover topic X" - if we can get those down and call them use cases - mint that as a FPWD - then derive requirements from them.

<manu> Ian: organizing framework from last week is not critical to use cases - but help people understand how use cases come together.

<manu> Ian: The example above helps us bind the phases to narrative - they're useful for a comms tool, but not at the heart of the use cases work.

dezell: It's important for the group to continue to review the work and stay tuned in.

[IJ Welcomes Kepeng Li from Alibab!]

Kepeng: Still possible to send use cases to the group for review?

Manu: Yes

<Kepeng_Li_Alibaba> Yes

Manu: Send to mailing list or put directly in the wiki
... but mailing list is preferred for discussion
... wiki less likely to prompt discussion

https://www.w3.org/Payments/IG/wiki/Main_Page

Use Cases ([use_cases]): This task force gathers use-cases that the IG is planning to address. See the Web Payments Use Cases Editor's Draft.

Qian: We want to include a use case about biometrics

Glossary

<dezell> Evert's email https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-webpayments-ig/2015Mar/0017.html

Evert: I would like to get to a generic payment flow description
... while i was struggling on ideas, Ian did work on http://www.w3.org/2015/Talks/ij-usecases/?full#4
... key question is: what will remain?
... there is also good work in the use cases doc on simpler vocab (but may not be exactly right for payment industry)
... so we need to define the relation between all this.

Evert: so glossary could involve redrafting to bind to working terminology

<manu> Ian: Thanks Evert - haven't had a chance to read the email yet. One observation was that a lot of the stuff that you are doing in the diagrams may usefully appear further down in the use cases document. I stayed at a very high level in the introduction. Accessible to a broader audience, but we don't want to lose payment professionals by doing that.

<manu> Ian: I don't want to scare anyone off or make this not useful to certain audiences - like payment professionals or potential implementers.

<manu> Ian: Companion to the use cases - manifests itself once we talk about requirements - don't know yet.

Manu: I think what we are going to try to do is take the glossary you have and the one that's being worked on in the use cases
... and put in a single document that can be shared across the set of documents we produce
... (Single source)

<manu> https://dvcs.w3.org/hg/webpayments/raw-file/default/latest/glossary/index.html

Manu: That doc exists (but is currently a mess)
... the hope is that we will be able to merge the material and then cross reference terms here to other docs such as 20022 terms

Evert: May want to keep the human readable terms in the use cases doc, then link to more detailed industry terms in the glossary

Manu: What's holding this up right now is a technical issue (to be able to import terms into the w3c document tool called "Respec" which is used for the use cases doc)

Evert: Who will do that?

Ian: That's action 70 -> https://www.w3.org/Payments/IG/track/actions/70

Evert: I will leave the diagram here https://www.w3.org/Payments/IG/wiki/Context

for when we need it

<evert> https://www.w3.org/Payments/IG/wiki/Context

Evert: So happy to leave "on stock" for now and chat with Ian about organizing the material

dezell: Let's close 54

<scribe> ACTION: Ian to organize a chat with Evert, David, and Manu about organizing materials for all audiences [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2015/03/04-wpay-minutes.html#action03]

<trackbot> Created ACTION-74 - Organize a chat with evert, david, and manu about organizing materials for all audiences [on Ian Jacobs - due 2015-03-11].

Payment Agent

<padler> https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Member/member-webpayments-ig/2015Mar/0006.html

Pat: see email for key things I think need to be in document

<padler> https://github.com/pat-adler/webpayments-ig/blob/master/latest/payment-agent/index.html

Pat: I will advance doc before payment agent call on Friday

dezell: Thanks for helping advance payment agent work...will be important as part of staying on schedule

padler: The collection of diagrams we have is great; now want to move to a more formal structure

Security Task Force

Laurent: No updates; I was mostly focused on use cases topics.
... and had a (long) discussion with Ian ... and we want definitely to discuss the issue of how the payment agent security model intersects with the web security model
... so that's a topic for our agenda but we've not started task force discussions yet

dezell: Yes, and need to be foliowing the work of the security groups.

Update re: ISO and X9

Claudia: Regarding external activities ISO 12812 (mobile banking standard) is going to vote in April
... it's a 90-day ballot
... votes are due back 9 July.
... expectation is that issues have been addressed, and so the expectation is the standard will be approved
... with an adoption date of May 2016
... the standard is reasonably high-level
... I would not be surprised if different countries had to develop market-specific implementation guidance
... some details not fully addressed in the standard.
... another standard that may be of interest is X9\.119 Part 2 (tokenization standard)
... it's different from other card brand solutions or that PCI has come forward with
... this is more of an end-to-end standard
... that particular standard will likely go to vote this summer with a view to being approved no later than Nov (approx)

<manu> Ian: Claudia, do you have any one sentence summary of how you think these documents will impact our work here?

Claudia: I think in particular, the mobile work...we'll want to look at how they are looking at the payment agent...the interface between the device and the web...and how they are proposing that the security work.
... So how we approach security will probably determine the degree of relevance

EMV Migration

Claudia: The US Market is the last market moving to the adoption of chips in cards for strengthening card security infrastructure at POS
... the group leaving the coordination of implementation is EMV Migration Forum Forum (in the US)
... that org is also interested in card-not-present fraud
... they have written a white paper in the final stages and soon available
... they have a "Card Not Present Working Group"...the white paper identifies security solutions available that merchants may want to consider to strengthen their ecommerce sites
... a host of services currently available to merchants.

<padler> one of the reasons this is important is here... http://www.nfcworld.com/technology/replay-attack/

Claudia: that document could be useful to us (even if we don't have dependencies on it)
... especially card-related security.

<padler> specific to card-not-present/not present...

Claudia++ for the update

Manu: These updates are fantastic. I'm concerned that the group is not bridging the gap to follow up
... we need someone in the group to do closer tracking

dezell: +1

External Reviews ([external_reviews]): This task force provides feedback on relevant external specifications.

https://www.w3.org/Payments/IG/wiki/External_Reviews_Task_Force

<dezell> ian: how about a web payments twitter feed? this might help raise awareness.

IJ: One idea is crowdsource via a twitter account when something interesting crosses our desks

<padler> +1

<Zakim> manu, you wanted to focus on actually getting stuff into the document.

<padler> to getting into the document!!

Manu: We have to start making cross-references to other standards

Communications Strategy

<manu> Ian: We need to focus more on task force notes on communications strategy... I spent lots of time w/ Laurent on the phone.

http://www.w3.org/2015/Talks/ij-usecases/?full#1

<manu> Ian: There is a cleaner description on using four phases - Manu ported that into the use cases document - feedback is very welcome.

http://www.w3.org/2015/02/wpay-sample.html

<manu> Ian: Single narrative is also something we're focusing on ^^^

<manu> Ian: The important thing about use cases is that we capture everything we want to address - because stories are fairly different, it makes it hard to read - you're not following a full transaction from start to finish. I tried to write a single narrative w/ a priority use case. Organize it according to steps of the framework introduced last week.

<manu> Ian: We want something that's useful for someone that wants to understand this at a high level - what do we mean by "Web Payments" - what does it look like?

<manu> Ian: Consumer is interacting w/ the merchant - the document attempts to do whole narrative from beginning to end - whole payment flow - let's people understand that "discovery of offer", which is not something people often say to each other - but we explain it simply.

<manu> Ian: This is not an attempt to replace the use cases, it's to make them more accessible.

<evert> +1 to narrative

<manu> Ian: The narrative is meant to be read from beginning to end. The other use cases at the end are there to flesh out the ecosystem.

IJ: So is this useful?

manu: One of the nice things about this approach is that it helps us explain something at a high level
... a narrative that most people can understand.
... and the use cases can then be transformed into a shorter document with a set of very briefly described ("micro") use cases
... such a document would also be easier to contribute to.
... so general +1 to the narrative document, but want to be clear it is not meant to be the exhaustive set of use cases

dezell: Thanks, Ian. Having messaging work in the group is helpful.

[Let's do schedule next week]

zakim: Maybe we can label the steps in the phases without numbering them

IJ: Should we drop all number or just steps?

Padler: I think we will run into challenges, but having the steps identified as building blocks is useful

[Let's take to email]

Conference call time

Kepeng: Can we move a bit earlier?

IJ: What time would be acceptable even if late?

Kepeng: 2 hours earlier ok.

<scribe> ACTION: Dezell to revisit the weekly teleconference time [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2015/03/04-wpay-minutes.html#action04]

<trackbot> Created ACTION-75 - Revisit the weekly teleconference time [on David Ezell - due 2015-03-11].

Resolution: Ok to make 24 Feb minutes public http://www.w3.org/2015/02/24-wpay-minutes.html