TPAC 2015 issues list
webpayments edited this page Dec 1, 2015
·
10 revisions
Pages 89
- Home
- A Payments Initiation Architecture for the Web
- Adoption2017
- Agenda 12th November 2015 at 1700 UTC
- Agenda 17th December 2015 at 1700 UTC
- Agenda 19th November 2015 at 1700 UTC
- Agenda 20160107
- Agenda 20160121
- Agenda 20160128
- Agenda 20160204
- Agenda 20160211
- Agenda 20160310
- Agenda 20160317
- Agenda 20160331
- Agenda 20160407
- Agenda 20160414
- Agenda 20160421
- Agenda 20160428
- Agenda 20160505
- Agenda 20160512
- Agenda 20160519
- Agenda 20160526
- Agenda 20160602
- Agenda 20160609
- Agenda 20160616
- Agenda 20160623
- Agenda 20160728
- Agenda 20160804
- Agenda 20160811
- Agenda 20160818
- Agenda 20160825
- Agenda 20160901
- Agenda 20160908
- Agenda 20160915
- Agenda 20161006
- Agenda 20161020
- Agenda 20161027
- Agenda 20161103
- Agenda 20161110
- Agenda 20161117
- Agenda 20161201
- Agenda 20161208
- Agenda 20161215
- Agenda 20170105
- Agenda 20170112
- Agenda 20170119
- Agenda 20170126
- Agenda 20170202
- Agenda 20170209
- Agenda 20170216
- Agenda 20170223
- Agenda 20170302
- Agenda 3rd December 2015 at 1700 UTC
- Agenda for 3rd March telco
- All in the Browser
- Browser with remote Payment Apps
- Call for Consensus FPWD
- CFC_20140412
- Checkout API
- Components
- DeploymentExamples
- Extensibility_Notes
- F2F Agenda
- FTF March2017
- FTF Sep2016
- How it Works
- How the Working Group works
- Issue Summary
- MagWebinar
- Meeting Proposal 20161128
- Meetings
- Mobile Platform
- Networks List
- PaymentApp_Notes
- PaymentRequestFAQ
- PMI_Notes
- Proposed F2F Day 2 agenda
- RegistrationTypes
- Security and Privacy Considerations
- Spec_Notes
- Support for multi price and currency
- Synchronizing Github Issues with W3C Mailing Lists
- TestSuite
- TPAC 2015 issues list
- Web Payment Deployment Examples
- Web Payments Working Group FTF Meeting (July 2016)
- Web Payments Working Group Plan
- WPWG FTF Feb 2016
- WPWG FTF Feb 2016 Requirements
- Show 74 more pages…
Mailing list archives
Issues
- General
- Payment Request API
- Payment Method Identifiers
- Basic Card Payment
- Payment Apps API
- HTTP API and Messages
Tests
Adoption
Previous Topics
Clone this wiki locally
Introduction
At TPAC 2015 this year, we listed issues that require the attention of the working group. This wiki is a temporary repository for them, allowing the group to edit them before formally adopting them.
Topics
Payment App
- See RegistrationTypes
- Are remote Payment Apps in scope (e.g., do we need to support their registration)?
Payment Mediator
- How to handle the case when there are no registered payment instruments?
- How might legacy flows be supported if no suitable Payment Apps available? Does the API deal with it or does this fall outside of scope (question on deployment/transition approach)?
- Where is currency matching done if Payment App supports different from merchant requesting?
Flows
- See Flows
- Should flows be different for different types of payment instrument (e.g. Knife, fork, Spoon analogy from Brad) as supported in CG proposal? Where would implementation be and what data would influence this decision, where would data come from?
- Should an API call for completion of payment instrument flow be supported?
- Do we need to support risk assessment provider somewhere in flows?
- Is there a REST-API based message flow?
- How is ISO20022 integrated into the flow? Is it? Is it only for backend flows?
- How are refunds handled?
Messages
- Data format: JSON or JSON-LD?
- How do organizations layer additional information in the core messages (e.g., JSON + IETF-like registry; JSON-LD + industry-specific vocabularies)
Security
- Should the API be available only for secure contexts?
- Is HTTPS the basic underlying communication semantics/protocol?
- How are messages trusted (e.g., secure channel between sender and receiver, digital signatures on some messages)?