> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED],
> "James A. Donald" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Date: Wed, 16 Jun 1999 03:08:41 +0300
> Subject: Interoperable Micropayment Order
> Sender: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
> Jim and all: I'm happy to inform you that following your (Jim's) prompting,
> in the last face to face meeting of the W3C Micro Payments working group
> held today,
> the group accepted my proposal to proceed directly to define an
> Interoperable Micropayment Order. We seem to have reached already
> substantial agreements towards this major step towards completely
> interoperable micropayment systems (such as the use of RSA signatures).
> This is in addition to the other ongoing efforts in the working group, most
> noticeable the Common Markup for Per-fee-links recommendation, a draft of
> which is moving to `last call` and is publicly available in the W3C
> Micropayments WG site http://www.w3.org/ECommerce/Micropayments/
>
> We look forward to feedback on the published draft - and invite all
> interested W3C members to join the WG! Existing members include what I
> believe are the most significant vendors in the micropayments area -
> Compaq, France Telecom and IBM.
I suppose it is time for my usual grumble about closed shops and W3C. I
am not a member of W3C and therefore can't join this WG. Most people in
the free software space have the same problem. Why is the W3C cartel
considered an appropriate forum for this (or any standards) work?
Also, why do people persist in thinking that using RSA signatures is a
"major step forward"?
Cheers,
Ben.
--
http://www.apache-ssl.org/ben.html
"My grandfather once told me that there are two kinds of people: those
who work and those who take the credit. He told me to try to be in the
first group; there was less competition there."
- Indira Gandhi
