IRC log of apps on 2017-04-18

Timestamps are in UTC.

13:58:42 [RRSAgent]
RRSAgent has joined #apps
13:58:42 [RRSAgent]
logging to
13:59:32 [AdrianHb]
AdrianHb has joined #apps
14:00:56 [rouslan]
rouslan has joined #apps
14:01:02 [rouslan]
14:01:20 [Ian]
14:01:27 [Ian]
present+ Conor
14:01:39 [alyver]
alyver has joined #apps
14:01:46 [alyver]
present+ alyver
14:02:09 [ConorH]
ConorH has joined #apps
14:02:19 [jnormore]
14:02:26 [ConorH]
14:02:43 [Ian]
zakim, who's here?
14:02:43 [Zakim]
Present: rouslan, Ian, Conor, alyver, jnormore, ConorH
14:02:45 [Zakim]
On IRC I see ConorH, alyver, rouslan, AdrianHb, RRSAgent, MattS, jnormore, Zakim, cweiss, adamR, Dongwoo, Ian, JakeA
14:02:54 [Ian]
present- Conor
14:02:55 [Ian]
present+ AdrianHB
14:03:00 [Ian]
present+ Christian
14:03:04 [Ian]
present+ Joseph
14:04:10 [Ian]
topic: Introduction
14:04:18 [Ian]
[Joseph Xu]
14:04:22 [Ian]
..first time on the call.
14:04:32 [ConorH]
Welcome Joseph :)
14:05:03 [Ian]
-> Agenda
14:05:06 [Ian]
14:05:29 [Ian]
zakim, take up item 1
14:05:29 [Zakim]
agendum 1. "Recent changes to Payment Handler API" taken up [from Ian]
14:06:05 [Ian]
14:06:31 [Ian]
* Updated short name / URL
14:06:31 [Ian]
* Add support for topLevelOrigin and paymentRequestOrigin
14:06:31 [Ian]
* Added 2 diagrams (worked on with MattS). (Can we close 49?)
14:06:31 [Ian]
* Issue markers
14:06:31 [Ian]
* Many markup fixes, tidy (please tidy edits henceforth!)
14:08:22 [Ian]
present+ MattS
14:08:34 [adamR]
14:08:48 [Ken]
Ken has joined #apps
14:09:03 [Ian]
present+ Ken
14:09:30 [Ian]
zakim, close item 1
14:09:30 [Zakim]
agendum 1, Recent changes to Payment Handler API, closed
14:09:31 [Zakim]
I see 4 items remaining on the agenda; the next one is
14:09:31 [Zakim]
2. Adrian's edits [from Ian]
14:09:33 [Ian]
zakim, take up item 2
14:09:33 [Zakim]
agendum 2. "Adrian's edits" taken up [from Ian]
14:10:24 [Ian]
14:11:11 [Ian]
AdrianHb: My edits were primarily editorial
14:11:40 [Ian]
...the main thrust of what I was getting at was making it clear that what the spec defines is this new event handler
14:11:49 [Ian]
...we are defining a way to response to a particular payment event
14:12:02 [Ian]
...there's a new feature in the platform (payment handlers) that handle this new event
14:12:04 [Newcomer]
Newcomer has joined #apps
14:12:20 [Ian]
..then you build on that - how do I instruct a browser to raise the event when payment events that I can handle are being processed?
14:12:32 [Ian]
...that's when you bring in the term PaymentManager
14:12:48 [Ian]
14:12:58 [Ian]
14:13:09 [Ian]
Payment App? Handler? Manager?
14:13:39 [Ian]
14:13:52 [MattS]
14:14:02 [Ian]
1) Key thing we are defining in the platform is the payment handler. It stand on its own as a feature
14:14:24 [Ian] allows you to process payment requests. It makes no assumptions about where those requests originate; they don't HAVE to come through the payment request API
14:14:59 [Ian]
...the focus is on payment handlers..pieces of code that are invoked when an event is raised.
14:15:17 [Ian]
2) Another piece of the spec is how we manage metadata about the handlers - methods, instruments, wallets
14:15:30 [Ian]
...I see the PaymentManager as layering on the handler but not essential to the handler functionality
14:16:08 [Ian] the PaymentManager is a feature we are adding (to service worker registration) that qualifies the payment handler
14:16:25 [Ian]
...I think PaymentManager but we could call it something like PaymentMethodManager or PaymentInstrumentManager
14:16:29 [MattS]
+1 to PaymentInstrumentManager, much more explicit
14:16:43 [MattS]
or in fact if thats a mouthful, InstrumentManager
14:17:23 [Ian]
3) A payment app is a specialization of a Web App that uses these features
14:17:28 [adamR]
The problem with “InstrumentManager” is that this is going in to the top-level ServiceWorker scope. It needs to make sense in the context of the broader web platform.
14:17:35 [Ian]
14:17:36 [MattS]
14:17:41 [Ian]
ack Matts
14:17:59 [Ian]
MattS: I appreciate AHB's description and Ian's scribing. I think the spec does not reflect that yet
14:18:18 [Ian]
..the first point is that the spec is called PaymentHandler...from what you said, the spec should be called Payment App
14:19:20 [Ian]
IJ: Rationale against Payment App was "too broad"
14:19:36 [Ian]
MattS: Make sense but now too narrow, IMO
14:20:04 [AdrianHb]
+1 to PaymentHandlerRequest
14:20:04 [Ian]
MattS: Maybe we need to change PaymentAppRequest/PaymentAppResponse => PaymentHandlerRequest/PaymentAppResponse
14:20:08 [Ian]
14:20:49 [Ian]
MattS: The reason I wanted the diagram was to clarify the entities etc....the diagrams are missing PaymentManager
14:21:05 [Ian]
adrianHB: PaymentManager exists under service use it to register to register instruments and wallets
14:21:22 [Ian]
14:21:49 [Ian]
MattS: I suggest we leave 127 open for FPWD...but would be nice to have some consistency for FPWD
14:22:05 [Ian] a minimum, I suggest we represent PaymentManager in the diagram (instead of PaymentHandler)
14:22:09 [Ian]
...I will continue to review
14:22:47 [Ian]
14:22:55 [Ian]
14:23:50 [Ian]
IJ: Why not say "one or more payment handler" (cf my proposal)?
14:24:13 [Ian]
14:25:07 [Ian]
"Payment apps make use of service workers to register their payment handling capabilities with the user agent. This is done through one or more payment handlers, which listen to PaymentRequestEvents raised through the Payment Request API."
14:26:07 [Ian]
IJ: My point is don't say "one"
14:27:30 [MattS]
why not say payment apps must each use a service worker
14:27:32 [Ian]
Payment apps make use of (one or more) service workers, each of which defines...
14:31:51 [Ian]
14:31:57 [Ian]
zakim, close item 2
14:31:57 [Zakim]
agendum 2, Adrian's edits, closed
14:31:58 [Zakim]
I see 3 items remaining on the agenda; the next one is
14:31:58 [Zakim]
3. Seeking additional reviewer [from Ian]
14:32:09 [Ian]
zakim, close item 4
14:32:09 [Zakim]
agendum 4, Issue 127: Do we need "Payment Manager" and "Payment Handler”?, closed
14:32:11 [Zakim]
I see 2 items remaining on the agenda; the next one is
14:32:11 [Zakim]
3. Seeking additional reviewer [from Ian]
14:32:15 [Ian]
zakim, take up item 3
14:32:15 [Zakim]
agendum 3. "Seeking additional reviewer" taken up [from Ian]
14:32:46 [rouslan]
14:32:50 [Ian]
ack rouslan
14:33:05 [Ian]
Rouslan: I read the document. I update the android spec as well.
14:33:13 [Ian]
...I had one small issue, which I will put on github
14:33:29 [Ian]
(IJ has read it)
14:34:39 [Ian]
MattS: I will review the updated doc
14:34:51 [Ian]
...will review changes by Thursday
14:35:38 [Ian]
[Example updates?]
14:36:04 [Ian]
AdamR: I think one of the examples is incorrect. There are also stylistic differences...
14:36:19 [Ian]
....e.g., "wait" instead of "then" could be an improvement...
14:36:29 [Ian]
...I think Marco's improves would probably help a lot
14:36:33 [adamR]
14:37:34 [Ian]
Rouslan: I will look at AHB's javascript
14:37:59 [Ian]
14:38:21 [Ian]
zakim, take up item 5
14:38:21 [Zakim]
agendum 5. "Status wrt FPWD" taken up [from Ian]
14:38:33 [Ian]
IJ: I would like to start a CfC around 1 May (for 1 week)
14:39:23 [Ian]
...if all goes well, FPWD week of 8 May
14:40:15 [Ian]
PROPOSED: The task force recommends the Chairs start a CFC for Payment Handler (after last round of edits) around 1 May
14:40:24 [rouslan]
14:40:30 [AdrianHb]
14:40:31 [Ian]
14:40:32 [ConorH]
14:40:52 [adamR]
14:41:01 [Ian]
topic: Implementer update
14:41:25 [Ian]
IJ: What are the opportunities implementers will have to play with this?
14:41:43 [Ian]
Rouslan: Chromium has a near complete implementation of this API.
14:41:51 [Ian]
...we'd like to start experimentation after FPWD
14:42:33 [Ian]
IJ: Any firefox updates?
14:42:48 [Ian]
AdamR: Marcos and Matt have been doing some specific update on progress for today
14:44:04 [Ian]
IJ: Can we institute an implementation focused semi-regular call after FPWD so that user agents and app developers can work together
14:44:05 [Ian]
Conor: +1`
14:44:43 [adamR]
14:44:55 [adamR]
Ian: and
14:44:57 [Ian]
Topic: Next meeting
14:45:06 [Ian]
2 May
14:45:16 [rouslan]
14:45:37 [Ian]
RRSAgent, make minutes
14:45:37 [RRSAgent]
I have made the request to generate Ian
14:45:40 [Ian]
RRSAgent, set logs public
14:54:45 [jnormore]
jnormore has joined #apps
17:14:34 [cweiss]
cweiss has joined #apps
19:32:57 [cweiss]
cweiss has joined #apps
20:32:02 [cweiss]
cweiss has joined #apps
21:08:21 [cweiss]
cweiss has joined #apps