On Wed, Jun 17, 2009 at 10:03 AM, Mikko Ohtamaa <[email protected]> wrote: > > What is not done > - How payment processors register and show up the actual payment page. I am > not sure whether this should be embedded on the checkout review page or be a > new page in the checkout wizard.
I caught up with Mikko over on #getpaid to trade some ideas about this. And concluded that this needs more input from other users of getpaid. There are different kinds of payment processors. Googlecheck is probably at one extreme. It does not have a review page rendered by Plone. Instead Google Checkout does that rendering. In this case the users sees a Google Checkout button on the shopping cart and that redirects the buyer through to the Google Checkout wizard to complete the purchase. See www.africanbookscollective.com for an example. How should this fit in when there are multiple payment processors for the buyer to choose from? Should those options be (a) on the shopping cart. Then you'd might have a PayPal button and a GoogleCheckout button on the shopping cart. Or (b) on a follow up page immediately after the checkout. That would mean that you don't have to clutter the mini shopping cart portlet with all the different checkout buttons. There is a corner case for (b) where there is only one payment processor then that follow up page is skipped - the buyer would be redirected to the next step. In that case for something like Google Checkout the correct Google button should have been rendered on the shopping cart. >From a buyers point of view are their any other ways of doing this? Now... what extra from Mikko's work/proposal needs to be included to support any of this? While formulating the question I figured that it sounds like we need a checkout_button_view added to the list of customisable slots for each processor. That button may be used on either the shopping cart when there is only one payment processor or on the payment processor selection page when there are more than one. Thoughts? Any other parts of the payment process that needs customisable slots? For reference here is the audit of overrides that have been required in the past to achieve this level of customisation: http://code.google.com/p/getpaid/issues/detail?id=167 -- Michael Dunstan --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "getpaid-dev" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/getpaid-dev?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
