[cap-talk] Capability accounting

[Sandro Magi]

Norman Hardy wrote:
> In my NY Times example the agent in my browser responds to payment
> solicitations from the web site that arrive before the content arrives.
> Upon a solicitation for $100 it merely declines and gives you an
> error like one of the many error outcomes that http requires may now  
> produce.

Right, which is what I thought. How would this work on an Amazon-like
shopping site? Once you've paid for a high-priced item, it raises the
bar to that level? Or do you foresee this agent not being involved in
these sorts of transactions?

> There is no disputed payment because there is no payment!
> It is like the fraud of putting a magazine on a newsstand with a  
> sticker price of
> $100. You are protected from this fraud by not proffering the $100.

Right, I wasn't disputing this scenario, but disputed payments on a
varying prices on a single site once you've set a maximum.

Let's suppose that, as a habit, you're interested in only the NY Times
main editorial and the cartoon pages. The main editorial is 10c and the
cartoons are 3c.

Once you've viewed one editorial and thus increased your payment
threshold, NY Times increases the price for the cartoons to 9c. It's
still beneath your threshold, but since you weren't involved in the
transaction, it's a little surprising to have your NY Times costs almost
triple. This is the source of the dispute I was referring to.

> I had not spelled it out clearly. A browser (user) agent would
> impose the preset limit of payments once per user interaction.
> The total payments resulting in multiple internal AJAX transactions
> would so limited.

Whose dictates this though? The user's agent may not wish to pay it out,
but the web application may want it. Not all AJAX interactions are
created equal after all; some sites are designed such that new page
loads are also AJAX requests (like google mail).

Sandro