ECML v1.1: Field Specifications for E-Commerce
RFC 3106

 
Document Type RFC - Informational (April 2001; No errata)
Updated by RFC 4112
Obsoletes RFC 2706
Last updated 2013-03-02
Stream Legacy
Formats plain text pdf html
Stream Legacy state (None)
Document shepherd No shepherd assigned
IESG IESG state RFC 3106 (Informational)
Telechat date
Responsible AD (None)
Send notices to (None)
Network Working Group                                        D. Eastlake
Request for Comments: 3106                                      Motorola
Obsoletes: 2706                                             T. Goldstein
Category: Informational                                           Brodia
                                                              April 2001

             ECML v1.1: Field Specifications for E-Commerce

Status of this Memo

   This memo provides information for the Internet community.  It does
   not specify an Internet standard of any kind.  Distribution of this
   memo is unlimited.

Copyright Notice

   Copyright (C) The Internet Society (2001).  All Rights Reserved.

IESG Note:

   This document specifies version 1.1 of ECML and obsoletes RFC 2706
   which specifies version 1.0 of ECML. Both version 1.0 and 1.1 of ECML
   are products of the ECML alliance which is described in section 1.1
   of this document. The reader should note that version 2.0 of ECML is
   under development (as of the publication of this RFC) in the IETF in
   the TRADE Working Group.

Abstract

   Customers are frequently required to enter substantial amounts of
   information at an Internet merchant site in order to complete a
   purchase or other transaction, especially the first time they go
   there.  A standard set of information fields is defined as the first
   version of an Electronic Commerce Modeling Language (ECML) so that
   this task can be more easily automated, for example by wallet
   software that could fill in fields.  Even for the manual data entry
   case, customers will be less confused by varying merchant sites if a
   substantial number adopt these standard fields.  In addition, some
   fields are defined for merchant to consumer communication.

Eastlake & Goldstein         Informational                      [Page 1]
RFC 3106                    ECom Field Names                  April 2001

Acknowledgements

   The following persons, in alphabetic order, contributed substantially
   to the material herein:

            George Burne
            Joe Coco
            Jon Parsons
            James Salsman
            David Shepherd
            Kevin Weller

Table of Contents

   1. Introduction..................................................  2
   1.1 The ECML Alliance............................................  3
   1.2 Relationship to Other Standards..............................  4
   1.3 Areas Deferred to Future Versions............................  4
   2. Field Definitions and DTD.....................................  4
   2.1 Field List and Descriptions..................................  4
   2.1.1 Field List.................................................  5
   2.1.2 Field Foot Notes...........................................  7
   2.2 Use in HTML.................................................. 10
   2.3 An ECML 1.1 XML DTD.......................................... 11
   3. Using The Fields.............................................. 13
   3.1 Presentation of the Fields................................... 13
   3.2 Methods and Flow of Setting the Fields....................... 14
   3.3  HTML Example................................................ 14
   4. Security and Privacy Considerations........................... 16
   References....................................................... 16
   Appendix: Changes from ECML 1.0.................................. 18
   Authors' Addresses............................................... 19
   Full Copyright Statement......................................... 20

1. Introduction

   Today, numerous merchants are successfully conducting business on the
   Internet using HTML-based forms.  The data formats used in these
   forms vary considerably from one merchant to another.  End-users find
   the diversity confusing and the process of manually filling in these
   forms to be tedious.  The result is that many merchant forms,
   reportedly around two thirds, are abandoned during the fill in
   process.

   Software tools called electronic wallets can help this situation.  A
   digital wallet is an application or service that assists consumers in
   conducting online transactions by allowing them to store billing,
   shipping, payment, and preference information and to use this

Eastlake & Goldstein         Informational                      [Page 2]
RFC 3106                    ECom Field Names                  April 2001

   information to automatically complete merchant interactions.  This
   greatly simplifies the check-out process and minimizes the need for a
   consumer to think about and complete a merchant's form every time.
   Digital wallets that fill forms have been successfully built into
Show full document text