<zkoch> Another Zach?!

<Ian> scribe: erik

<Ian> David: Any issues with previous minutes?

dave: One of the things that fell off the agenda, any issues we have missed? Add to todays agenda, etc.

Ian: Prioritize the charter followed by the working group agenda

Web Payments Working Group Charter Status

<Ian> Updated Web Payments Working Group Charter - Please share any concerns by 12 October

<Ian> https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-webpayments-ig/2015Oct/0033.html

<dezell> Agenda: https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-webpayments-ig/2015Oct/0040.html

<dezell> Scribe: Erik Anderson

<dezell> Meeting: Web Payments IG Telcon

Ian: Updated the charter. Discuss any concerns with the changes in the IG? Recommending providing to the management committee.

<Zakim> manu, you wanted to note that we reviewed the Web Payments WG charter last week.

<manu> Notes input on Web Payments WG charter during previous work session call: http://www.w3.org/2015/10/08-wpay-minutes.html

Manu: Working group had some changes. I believe Ian made the changes.
... Link to the minutes.

<Ian> IJ: Any concerns?

Ian: I made a couple of changes per the discussion. Any concerns anyone has.

<Ian> [No responses]

<Ian> IJ: Do you support a recommendation to W3M to launch the WG with this revised charter?

<AdrianHB> +1

<dezell> +1

<zkoch> +1

<Nitin> +1

<ShaneM> +1

<Ryladog> +1

Ian: Please +1 support sending to W3M per the revised charter

<manu> manu: +1

<collier-matthew> +1

+1

<kris> +1

<jheuer> +1

<Jiangtao_Jia> +1

Ian: Still trying to close the loop for the objections. Going to the W3M on Wednesday.
... Make sure the testimonials are available for the launch of the group on the 21st.
... I havent received any concerns of the charter changes. I have incrementally been sharing the changes with people so I dont expect concerns for the launch.

F2F Agenda for Sapporo

Dave: Next topic is TPAC in Sapporo

<Ian> Agenda for IG meeting -> https://www.w3.org/Payments/IG/wiki/Main_Page/FTF_Oct2015#Detailed_2

<Ian> whoops -> https://www.w3.org/Payments/IG/wiki/Main_Page/FTF_Oct2015#Detailed

Dave: We have a workable agenda for Sapporo. People need to have their proposed topics submitted by today.

Ian: I am a bit behind on emails.

<Nitin> I will not be able to attend due to prior client commitment, but Arneau from IBM will be there repsenting IBM, I can send my presentations, but since I am not there I am holding it back.

<Nitin> I will attend the next F2F

Adrian: White paper released. Want to have a Webinar about the white paper.

<manu> Nitin: Arnaud? (not Arneau) ?

<Nitin> Interledger is very interesting, and I think it is an important

<Nitin> Manu: yes, sorry fat fingers :)

<Nitin> Arnaud Le Hors - from IBM

<Nitin> I read the paper, we may need to have a collaborative approach on that

<Ian> Erik: I met your boss, Adrian last week. They were discussing the inter ledger protocol

<Ian> ...a topic that came up are the identity issues

<Ian> ...has any work be done on the identity side for ledgers?

<Ian> ...that was a question not just for Ripple but for blockchain generally

Adrian: White paper is a technology white paper. Not a lot of regulatory involvement.

Kris: I believe Identity and regulatory requirements are an important topic of conversation.

Adian: We believe the W3C is the right place to tackle this work because of the quality of the participation.

Adrian: There will be elements of this work that are non-technical. We need to bring in new perspectives.

<AdrianHB> for those that missed the email, there is some further detail at https://www.w3.org/community/interledger/

<manu> manu: Let's have this discussion at TPAC - today is not the right time to have the discussion.

Kris: This topic is a concern of mine. Regulatory bodies will love to discuss this topic if they have a mechanism to be involved in the regulatory body.

<Nitin> I think that the protocol should conform to the regulation and not the other way round at the moment... as the tech evolves,, regulation will kee up...

<Nitin> our biggest challenege with ILP is around fittign in todays regulatory model

Dave: We need to authenticate attributes and bring up these topics from the previous F2F.

<Ian> IJ: Kris, perhaps you can help us formulate questions we might have for regulators.

Speaker: Need to formulate a way to have the discussion.

<Zakim> manu, you wanted to be clear - we can only provide hooks into the regulatory bodies and/or ensure that the solution is capable of operating in today's regulatory environment.

Web Payments WG agenda

<Ian> https://www.w3.org/Payments/IG/wiki/Main_Page/FTF_Oct2015#Detailed_2

Ian: I was going to jump to the next topic, Working Group ageda
... Technical topic.....?

<dezell> Ian: agenda is split into two pieces - day 1 is essentially tech topics like the proposals from WPCG, day 2 is more about the experience of running a working group

Ian: Brad Hill of Facebook and Web Application security working group will give us a discussion. Will also have a topic on accesibility. Discussion of ideas on javascript security. Chairs thought that it takes to run a successful group.
... One other topic, Alex Russel from Google, Web API discussion.
... Lots of how too in the first discussion.
... Lots of input from other discussions.
... Shared understanding of flows. Need a lead for this topic.

<nicktr> https://www.w3.org/Payments/IG/wiki/Main_Page/FTF_Oct2015#Working_Group_Agenda

<Zakim> manu, you wanted to add "hard questions" topic

Manu: One more addition to the topic. Hard questions. Identity, accessibility, wallet, how discovery is done.

+1 on hard questions

<Zakim> AdrianHB, you wanted to say I will be raising those in my slot at the end of Thrus

<Zakim> manu, you wanted to say that we may need those discussions at 10am.

Adrian: We need a bit of a background on the topics before introducing the topics

<manu> Erik: We do need to ask these hard questions - the things that may make us fail.

<manu> +1 - we're not trying to solve these hard questions - we're trying to get a shared understanding on what those hard questions are about.

Ian: Set expectations we arent solving the hard questions but a start to bringing up the hard questions.

<Ian> IJ: We should not have the expectation of answering hard questions at the first meeting. Rather, it's a good idea to build shared understanding of them

<Ian> Adrian: I am nervous to open meeting with controversy

<Ian> Adrian: Am inclined like Ian to focus on shared understanding

<Ian> ...so, e.g., with initial proposals we hear about them but not dissect them

Adrian: Lets not go down the dark holes of these hard discussions but just bring them up. Dont go deep into the proposals. Just put the proposals out, dont criticize them, but put them out and understand the intention of the proposals.

<Ian> Nick: Also +1 to Adrian

<kris> I agree with Adrain

<kris> Adrian

<Ian> Nick: Pose hard questions then get a beer

<AdrianHB> PROPOSAL: Enumerate the "hard questions" at the beginning and discuss them in some more detail at the end?

Nick: Adrians suggestion to bring up these at the end is a good idea so it doesnt consume all of our time

Manu: To clarify to not go in dept to the hard questions, just get a shared understanding what those questions are.

<Zakim> manu, you wanted to say we have violent agreement ... get shared understanding of hard questions... not try to solve them.

Manu: Just create a shared understanding. Lets not go into the weeds, just a shared understanding.

<AdrianHB> +1

Ian: We shouldnt jump into the topics without a shared understanding of the proposals.

<AdrianHB> +1 that the presentations should include some discussion around design decisions

<manu> +1 for presenters providing baseline understanding for proposals.

<Ian> IJ: The presenters should build shared understanding through use cases, design constraints, etc.

<Ian> Erik: Also, useful to have that material in advance.

Upcoming meetings

<Ian> - Resolved no meeting 2 November

<Nitin> I need to drop to prep for my client meeting... I did send some material to Ian on Wallets... and dropbox links

<Zakim> ShaneM, you wanted to talk about action items at f2f\

<Ian> Shane: We should keep actions fresh in people's mind post TPAC with tight deadlines

<manu> +1 to action items w/ short deadlines at F2F

Shane: We shouldnt meet the week after a F2F. We have a tendency to go silent after a F2F. We have action items that need to be documented.

<Ian> Shane: We should keep actions fresh in people's mind post TPAC with tight deadlines

This is scribe.perl Revision: 1.140  of Date: 2014-11-06 18:16:30  
Check for newer version at http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/~checkout~/2002/scribe/

Guessing input format: RRSAgent_Text_Format (score 1.00)

Found Scribe: erik
Inferring ScribeNick: Erik
Found Scribe: Erik Anderson
Scribes: erik, Erik Anderson
Present: Zach MattC David Erik Ian Manu ZachKoch Jiangtao nicktr ShaneM AdrianHB
Agenda: https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-webpayments-ig/2015Oct/0040.html

WARNING: No date found!  Assuming today.  (Hint: Specify
the W3C IRC log URL, and the date will be determined from that.)
Or specify the date like this:
<dbooth> Date: 12 Sep 2002

Guessing minutes URL: http://www.w3.org/2015/10/12-wpay-minutes.html
People with action items: 

WARNING: Input appears to use implicit continuation lines.
You may need the "-implicitContinuations" option.


WARNING: IRC log location not specified!  (You can ignore this 
warning if you do not want the generated minutes to contain 
a link to the original IRC log.)