As I noticed that the proposed Web Monetization standard is still a “unofficial draft” it probably is. But I wonder how close to a final proposal it is? Is it subject to drastic changes in the near future? This is a two sided question as a certain stability gives enabling constraints for proposing people but also takes away needed wiggle room in the hopefully evolving ecosystem. Once well on their way the GFTW awardees will surely learn more about their needs and requirements, will they have the means to influence the standard?
The currently proposal is very much geared around one method to monetize the web (streamed micro payments by WM providers on behalf of users as they consume specific content). However, I think that there are plenty of other potential web monetization use cases that could be at least prototyped. As some of them might prove to successfully empower content creators and consumers to be collaborate in a more transparent and fair way they probably also should find a home under the same standard.
Things I can quickly think of are the ability to have a one click unlock content for a small payment one off payment (small enough to make usual e-commerce payments uneconomical), or to auto-attach an additional monetary value to every day online actions such as likes, shares, or ratings.
Guess my question is, how far do proposing projects need to stick to the standard? Can a constructive critique be part of it? Around the lines, well here is project X, we would like to Y, to be able to do this the standard would have to be able to also do Z. Considering the deep thoughts that have been put into the standard, I’m a bit concerned that any divergence might disqualify a project just for technicalities.