Make the resource creation process a bit smoother

[steveklabnik]

From HN: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=7027434

More to come when I'm not taxi-ing in a plane.

[mjallday]

Revision 1.1 allows charging a card without tokenization!

[ajsharp]

@steveklabnik @mjallday If I'm interpreting what that guy is saying, basically he wants to be able to charge a card from the client such as in stripe.js in a single api call.

[steveklabnik]

Yes, that's how I read it too.—
Sent from Mailbox for iPhone

On Wed, Jan 8, 2014 at 7:37 PM, Alex Sharp notifications@github.com
wrote:

@steveklabnik @mjallday If I'm interpreting what that guy is saying, basically he wants to be able to charge a card from the client such as in stripe.js in a single api call.

Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
#472 (comment)

[jbrowning]

In my opinion it isn't necessarily about being able to do a debit call from balanced.js. Rather, it would be nice to be able to charge a tokenized card without creating a customer and then associating a card with them. As the author on HN said, charging a card for a once-off charge involves many API calls and in addition to the calls described by the author, I also take the extra precaution of invalidating the card to make it non-chargeable. So I end up making a total of 5 API calls including tokenization.

[mjallday]

This is covered by the Debit a card. It's two API calls, tokenize the card and debit the card. It can potentially done as one if you're PCI compliant and pass the card data straight in to the API instead of going via balanced.js.

@steveklabnik there doesn't appear to be a scenario for debiting an untokenized card.

[jbrowning]

@mjallday is this a new feature in 1.1? From the API 1.0 docs:

To charge a Card, you must create a debit. Before a Card can be debited, it must first be associated with a Customer

If you try to debit a card that has not been associated with a customer in 1.0 it fails with

Exactly one of [account_uri|customer_uri] must be specified

[mjallday]

@jbrowning yes sir it is.

[mahmoudimus]

#492 is relevant

[steveklabnik]

Yes, #492 is this issue, but better.