This is a draft summary of the June 2015 Face-to-Face meeting of the Web Payments Interest Group. See also raw minutes: 16 minutes, 17 minutes, 18 minutes.

Summary

• The primary goal for this meeting was to review a roadmap for payments standards and determine whether there was consensus to start Working Groups around any of the following topics: Payment Ecosystem Integration, Security, Identity and Credentials, and Settlement.
• The Interest Group reached consensus to create a Payment Architecture Working Group to create standard data formats and APIs for a minimum viable payment (see details on use cases in scope for version one below). A draft charter will be modified based on group discussion then reviewed by the group prior to being delivered to the W3C Management Team (in July). We will continue to work on the value proposition of this standards work (e.g., increasing payment gateway interoperability).
• The Interest Group also discussed plans for two authentication-related Working Groups whose charters are in development within the W3C Team. One will focus on secure authentication of entities (users, systems and devices) to enable high-security Web applications. The other will work on a set of Hardware-Based Web Security standard services providing Web Applications usage of secure services enabled by hardware modules (TEE, secure elements, and other secure enablers). The Interest Group will provide input to those groups based on payments requirements.
• The Interest Group did not reach consensus to launch a Working Group on Identity and Credentials (see credentials agenda plan). We anticipate continuing to solicit use cases from (international) stakeholders in the financial services, education, and healthcare industries to understand their Web standardization needs moving forward. Those conversations may take place in a variety of groups (including the Credentials Community Group).
• The Interest Group supported the proposal from Ripple Labs (following a presentation from Ripple Labs) to create a Settlement Community Group to explore how to use the Web as a means to bridge disparate payment networks and move toward a distributed settlement paradigm.
• The Interest Group reviewed the capabilities document (see capabilities agenda plan). Discussion focused on the organization of the document (and not the prioritization of capabilities, which was a separate discussion). Topics of interest included ecommerce v. (narrower) payments; use of terms "clearing and settlement" together; finding another term than "invoice" (e.g., payment confirmation); receipts are complex and we should not do them for v1; clarification that there are a spectrum of identity expectations for different types of transactions (e.g,. small value to high value). There are different corresponding privacy expectations.
• Use case / capability prioritization. The group walked through a list of proposed use cases to be covered in "version 1" of a Payments Architecture (across multiple Working Group charters). At a breakout session on day 2, some group participants reviewed the "at risk" set of use cases and proposed a revised list of use cases for inclusion. The group reviewed that proposal in plenary later in the day and reached consensus on a set of use cases for inclusion in version one (labels defined in Web Payments Use Cases 1.0):
  • Website
  • Registration-less
  • Ubiquitous Schemes
  • One-time Payment
  • Discovery
  • Payer Privacy
  • Manual selection (of payment instrument)
  • Both Payee and Payer-initiated payments (strong consensus)
  • Multi-factor (includes biometric) and Password-based authentication
  • Proofs
  • Payment confirmation (this is not about receipts, just confirmation)
  • Virtual goodes and physical goods (we expect to change name to be about delivery info)
• The group also agreed to these stretch goals for version 1 ("optional deliverables"):
  • Subscription (thus, more than one-time payment)
  • Common refunds
• There were additional suggestions for the next version of the use cases document, including adding regulatory annotations.
• Evert Fekkes and Adrian Hope-Bailie led a short discussion on the glossary including some key terms that need clear definitions (e.g., "payment") and the value of diagrams for illustrating payment flows.
• Zach Koch gave a presentation on browser perspective. Discussion focused primarily on user needs (e.g., improved usability) and merchant needs. Some points on why merchants adopt technology: maximizing conversion, consistent user experience across channels/devices, data about customers, fraud reduction and liability shift, lower rates for payments.
• Nick Shearer and Sam Weinig gave a brief overview of Apple Pay which helped provide some perspective on the Interest Group's vision of a Web payments architecture. The full presentation is available on Apple's WWDC site, raw video here for non-Mac platforms.
• Evan Schwartz also shared a prototype based on the group's discussion of a Payments Architecture Working Group charter that helped the group converge on an understanding of the sorts of APIs and data structures that the future Working Group might develop.
• Laurent Castillo gave a presentation on secure elements and the relation to the Web architecture. We related this discussion to the two authentication Working Group charters we anticipate seing soon.
• Mark Tiggas gave a presentation on lessons learned from ISO 12812 standardization experience
• James Dailey gave a presentation on the Level One Project of the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation.
• The group began discussions of adoption and deployment considerations including a presentation from Dave Raggett.
• The group prepared for the roundtable discussion that took place at the end of the IG meeting.
• The Interest Group is helping to prepare for the launch of a new Working Group, but there is much more to do to flesh out use cases, requirements, and capabilities, and to keep moving topics forward such as commerce, identity, and settlement.