Re: [w3ctag/design-reviews] Back/Forward Cache (#628)

Hello! During last month's F2F, Chrome's BFCache team met with TAG and discussed how we can improve BFCache-support checking during TAG reviews, as we have noticed some APIs had gone through TAG review but don't support BFCache.

One thing we decided to do is to rewrite the [Design Principles guide](https://w3ctag.github.io/design-principles/#support-non-fully-active) and [Security & Privacy Questionnaire question](https://www.w3.org/TR/security-privacy-questionnaire/#non-fully-active) to be simpler and more explicit, and move the full BFCache guide into a separate document, like the [Promise Guide](https://www.w3.org/2001/tag/doc/promises-guide). I've finished rewriting the guide (with lots of input from @domenic, @fergald, and @cynthia) and can be found here:
* Security & Privacy Questionnaire: [HTML version](https://rakina.github.io/security-questionnaire/), [Google Docs version](https://docs.google.com/document/d/1jE7qIBrctm778nUyzHAlrs-v8TK90vJnXSxgw0rx8Dw/edit#heading=h.y3vaaqr2n1hj), [Draft PR](https://github.com/w3ctag/security-questionnaire/pull/144)
* Design Principles: [HTML version](https://rakina.github.io/design-principles/), [Google Docs version](https://docs.google.com/document/d/1jE7qIBrctm778nUyzHAlrs-v8TK90vJnXSxgw0rx8Dw/edit#heading=h.u8nqs4k0yd5i), [Draft PR](https://github.com/w3ctag/design-principles/pull/392)
* New "Supporting BFCached Documents" doc: [HTML version](https://rakina.github.io/bfcache-guide/),  [Google Docs version](https://docs.google.com/document/d/1jE7qIBrctm778nUyzHAlrs-v8TK90vJnXSxgw0rx8Dw/edit#heading=h.6grduywchojv). Not really sure how to make a PR for this since it's a brand new doc. Any suggestions?

We're hoping the TAG will reopen this issue to review the rewritten docs (cc @hober and @torgo). We also realized that the docs didn't get reviewed by other browser vendors last time, so tagging @smaug---- and @cdumez (or other BFCache folks from Mozilla/Apple) to review the new documents.

Other ideas that came up during the TAG F2F was:
* Adding an explicit "BFCache considerations" section to specs, which @domenic is trying out with some new specs we're working on, we'll see if we can get that be a required section for new specs.
* Improvements to the TAG design review process to be more consistent and follow the latest guidelines. I don't really have much visibility into this, but looking forward to seeing the improvements!

-- 
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
https://github.com/w3ctag/design-reviews/issues/628#issuecomment-1227165134
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.

Message ID: <w3ctag/design-reviews/issues/628/1227165134@github.com>