CFC PaymentHandler FPWD

[This is a draft announcement]

Subject

• Call for Consensus on Publishing Payment Handler API as a First Public Working Draft - RESPONSE REQUESTED

Body

Dear Web Payments Working Group Participants,

At the Chicago face-to-face meeting there was support [1] for issuing a Call for Consensus (CfC) to publish Payment Handler API as a First Public Working Draft.

This is a Call for Consensus to publish:

 Payment Handler API
 https://github.com/w3c/webpayments-payment-handler/tree/fpwd_20170502

 Readable view:
 https://rawgit.com/w3c/webpayments-payment-handler/fpwd_20170502/index.html?specStatus=FPWD

We would like to thank the editors for preparing this document.

PLEASE RESPOND to the proposal by 11 May 2017 (10am ET).

For the co-Chairs,
Ian Jacobs

[1] https://www.w3.org/2017/03/24-wpwg-minutes#item05

=========
PROPOSAL

That the Web Payments Working Group request that the W3C Director approve the 
above specification as a First Public Working Draft.

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 11 May 2017 (10am ET) for the proposal, it will carry.

====================
REMINDERS ABOUT NOTES, CONSENSUS, AND FORMAL OBJECTIONS

* Publication as a First Public Working Draft does NOT indicate that a document
  is complete or represents Working Group consensus.

* In case of a decision to publish, the Chairs will request approval from the W3C
  Director to publish a First Public Working Draft. In this case, if you wish your LACK
  of support to publish to be conveyed to the Director and reviewed, please include 
  the phrase "FORMAL OBJECTION" [2] in your response and be sure to include
  substantive arguments or rationale.

* Silence will be taken to mean there is no Formal Objection [2].

* The W3C Director takes Formal Objections seriously, and therefore
  they typically require significant time and effort to
  address. Therefore, please limit any Formal Objections to issues
  related to the scope of these documents rather than technical
  content where the Working Group has not yet made a decision.

* 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.

[2] https://www.w3.org/2017/Process-20170301/#Consensus