Re: [w3ctag/design-reviews] Specification review for fenced frames (Issue #838)

Hi @blu25 - we are just reviewing it today.  We appreciate you taking the time to collate the information you've provided. However, it's difficult for us to parse the list - which is a lot of links to PRs where you need a lot of context to understand how they fit in, context that we lack.  This is one reason we ask for explainers with reviews - which provide that context.
  
I'd also like to point out that we've returned a [negative review on Protected Audience](https://github.com/w3ctag/design-reviews/issues/723#issuecomment-1944367149). So if there is a hard dependency now between this work and Protected Audience then it's unlikely that this will get a positive review from TAG.
  
Even so, we strongly recommend that you write an **explainer** which talks through this proposal, starting from **user needs** - as documented in our [explainer guide](https://tag.w3.org/explainers/).

-- 
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
https://github.com/w3ctag/design-reviews/issues/838#issuecomment-2111840642
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.

Message ID: <w3ctag/design-reviews/issues/838/2111840642@github.com>