w3c / w3c/payment-request

Richer negotiation re: address redaction?

Open
#842 46 comments 0 reactions 0 assignees View on GitHub

Nobody has claimed this yet.

Formal Objection Future Candidate Feature i18n-tracker privacy-needs-resolution
Dominant language
HTML
Stars
510
Forks
139
PR merge metrics
No merged PRs in 30d

Description

As I think about how "billing addresses" are used in practice in the US: sometimes portions of them (e.g. only a postal (ZIP) code) are used by card issuers for validation. Sometimes merchants want complete addresses for other reasons. Does it make sense to have a requester explain exactly what address elements it wants, and why?

Consolidated explanation of my concern below at:
https://github.com/w3c/payment-request/issues/842#issuecomment-473907871

Contributor guide

Open the contributing guide

First steps

  1. Read the whole issue, then the project's contributing guide.
  2. Comment on the issue to say you are picking it up — it saves two people doing the same work.
  3. Fork the repository and make your change on a branch.
  4. Open a pull request that references the issue number.

Research direction

Start with the consolidated concern in the linked issue comment and then read the surrounding discussion in issue #842. Determine whether the Payment Request API needs a requester-defined set of address elements and stated purpose; done requires a resolved proposal or decision, not just an implementation.

Written by the indexing model from the issue text.

Assessment

Tech stack
html
Domain
api, payments
Issue type
Feature
Difficulty
5/5
Estimated time
Over a week
Activity status
Stale
Clarity
Needs clarification
Newbie friendliness
25/100

Get new issues in your inbox

A short digest of beginner-friendly GitHub issues.