RFC 3106: ECML v1.1: Field Specifications for E-Commerce
In plain English — editorial summary, not part of the RFC
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. This memo provides information for the Internet community.
Document record
- Document ID
- RFC3106
- Published
- April 2001
- Authors
- D. Eastlake 3rd; T. Goldstein
- Status
- INFORMATIONAL
- Stream
- Legacy
- Area
- —
- Pages
- 20
- Also known as
- —
Topics
Referenced by
One later RFC formally updates or obsoletes part of this document.
Related documents
Ranked automatically by shared keywords, IETF area and stream — not by editorial selection.
- RFC 3120A URN Namespace for XML.orgCurrent
June 2001
- RFC 3179Script MIB Extensibility Protocol Version 1.1Current
October 2001
- RFC 2731Encoding Dublin Core Metadata in HTMLObsoleted
December 1999
- RFC 2629Writing I-Ds and RFCs using XMLObsoleted
June 1999
- RFC 2593Script MIB Extensibility Protocol Version 1.0Obsoleted
May 1999
- RFC 2552Architecture for the Information Brokerage in the ACTS Project GAIACurrent
April 1999
- RFC 2413Dublin Core Metadata for Resource DiscoveryObsoleted
September 1998
- RFC 2376XML Media TypesObsoleted
July 1998
Also filed under
About this page
The document record above — title, authors, date, status, stream, area, relationships, DOI and errata — is imported verbatim from the public RFC Editor index. The “in plain English” section is editorial: written by The metasystema editorial team, not part of the RFC. Where the two differ, the RFC text governs.
Last checked against the RFC Editor index on . RFCs are never revised after publication; changes are issued as new documents.
Data sources · Editorial policy · Report a correction · What is an RFC?