CFC PaymentRequest CR

[This is a draft announcement]

Subject

• Call for Consensus to Publish Two Candidate Recommendations - RESPONSE REQUESTED

Body

Dear Web Payments Working Group Participants,

This is a Call for Consensus to publish the following specifications as Candidate Recommendations:

Payment Request API
https://rawgit.com/w3c/browser-payment-api/a7e1bdab27ec6ae78d56c32ec0d20ba3df03f387/index.html?specStatus=CR&crEnd=2017-10-31&implementationReportURI=https://w3.org/tbc

Payment Method Identifiers
https://rawgit.com/w3c/webpayments-method-identifiers/cbaf864de1d46d93ce60e34b7b3cd643073243ae/index.html?specStatus=CR&crEnd=2017-10-31&implementationReportURI=https://w3.org/tbc

We would like to thank the editors for preparing these documents.

PLEASE RESPOND to the proposal by 26 July 2017 (10am ET).

For the co-Chairs,
Ian Jacobs

=========
PROPOSAL

That the Web Payments Working Group request that the W3C Director
approve publication of Payment Request API and Payment Method Identifiers
as Candidate Recommendations.

Please indicate one of the following in your response:

1. Support the proposal.

2. Request some changes, but support the proposal even
  if suggested changes are not taken into account.

3. Request some changes, and do not support the proposal
  unless the changes are taken into account.

4. Do not support the proposal (please provide rationale).

5. Support the consensus of the Web Payments Working Group.

6. Abstain.

We invite you to include rationale in your response.

If there is strong consensus by 26 July 2017 (10am ET) for the
proposal, it will carry.

==========================
About Candidate Rec Status

* A W3C Candidate Recommendation is a document that satisfies the
Working Group's technical requirements, and has already received
wide review. W3C publishes a Candidate Recommendation to:

- signal to the wider community that it is time to do a final review.
- gather implementation experience.
- begin formal review by the Advisory Committee, who may recommend
  that the document be published as a W3C Recommendation, returned to
  the Working Group for further work, or abandoned.
- Provide an exclusion opportunity per the W3C Patent Policy.

For more information, see:
https://www.w3.org/2017/Process-20170301/#maturity-levels

==========================
Formal Objections

* If you wish your LACK of support to publish to be conveyed to the
Director and reviewed, please include the phrase "FORMAL OBJECTION"
in your response and be sure to include substantive arguments or
rationale. The W3C Director takes Formal Objections seriously, and
therefore they typically require significant time and effort to
address.

* Silence will be taken to mean there is no Formal Objection.

* If there are Formal Objections, the Chairs plan to contact the
individual(s) who made them to see whether there are changes that
would address the concern and increase consensus to publish.

For more information, see:
https://www.w3.org/2017/Process-20170301/#Consensus

===========================
Transition Request Following a Working Group Decision to Publish

* In case of a decision to publish, the Chairs will request approval
from the W3C Director to publish Candidate Recommendations
(including review of any Formal Objections).

* A Candidate Recommendation transition request to the Director will provide information
required by the W3C Process:
https://www.w3.org/2017/Process-20170301/#candidate-rec

* The Editors are tracking the required information:
https://github.com/w3c/browser-payment-api/issues/520

For more information about transition requests, see:
https://www.w3.org/Guide/transitions?profile=CR&cr=new