Re: Last call CSP Level 2

An extension to the LC period is fine with me if it means you'll have a
chance to review and give feedback. I want to get this out the door, but I
also want to make sure it's well-vetted. *shrug* What's a reasonable
timeline for your team to start threads around their concerns?

-mike

--
Mike West <mkwst@google.com>
Google+: https://mkw.st/+, Twitter: @mikewest, Cell: +49 162 10 255 91

Google Germany GmbH, Dienerstrasse 12, 80331 München, Germany
Registergericht und -nummer: Hamburg, HRB 86891
Sitz der Gesellschaft: Hamburg
Geschäftsführer: Graham Law, Christine Elizabeth Flores
(Sorry; I'm legally required to add this exciting detail to emails. Bleh.)


On Wed, Aug 13, 2014 at 4:11 PM, Kevin Hill <khill@microsoft.com> wrote:

>  I am requesting just a slight extension to the last call if possible.
> Our team was reviewing the spec and found items in the below areas where
> we’d like to ask a few more questions or provide feedback.  I’ve been out
> with some vacation time, work trips, and personal affairs.  We was starting
> to read through the archives to make sure I wasn’t rehashing conversations
> that have been had.  We don’t want to disrupt the overall community effort
> to get this spec signed off, but we do want to make sure we’ve been able to
> help with the developments of the spec.  We don’t have major items that are
> of concern, so if there is another option for minor tweaks and
> clarifications over the next couple of weeks, or at the next in person set
> of meetings that would be wonderful.
>
>
>
> The sections we are interested in diving deeper are:
>
> ·       4.4 (Reporting) – General questions from my developer to
> investigate
>
> ·       5 (Processing Model) – user-agent by-pass enforcement
>
> ·       5.1 (Workers) - Workers changes
>
> ·       7.14 (reflected-xss) – interested in the conversations from the
> community here, not anything technical.
>
>
>
>
>
> Any consideration is appreciated.
>
>
>
> Best regards,
>
>
>
> Kevin Hill
>
>
>