Re: [w3ctag/spec-reviews] Review request for Feature Policy (#159)

One initial comment, based on a quick look, is that I think it might be helpful if the [Other and related mechanisms section](https://wicg.github.io/feature-policy/#other-and-related-mechanisms) were a bit clearer.  It's not clear to me what some of the prose in it means.  But, more importantly, as the number of feature restriction mechanisms increases, the need for clear guidance to future designers of platform features (spec authors and implementors) becomes more important.

I expect the TAG is going to need to add a section to [our design principles document](https://w3ctag.github.io/design-principles/) offering suggestions about which mechanisms should be used in which contexts; we've already had this sort of discussion a number of times, leading to https://github.com/w3ctag/design-principles/issues/41 being filed, but I expect the issue will need to be even broader.

So I think it would probably be useful if the authors of this specification were to provide a clearer statement, probably in that section (at least for now, although we might need to put it someplace common eventually), of when they think future features should be added to feature-policy vs. CSP vs. values of the sandbox attribute vs. allow-* attributes on iframe.

-- 
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
https://github.com/w3ctag/spec-reviews/issues/159#issuecomment-286855214