Re: [w3ctag/design-reviews] Review for Protected Audiences Bidding and Auction Services API (Issue #1009)

We're looking at this in the context of the [overall negative review of Protected Audience from February](https://github.com/w3ctag/design-reviews/issues/723#issuecomment-1944367149). The TAG generally thinks that you should only extend problematic and non-consensus features if the extension acts to fix the problems. Our understanding is that this sub-feature does not contribute to addressing the [problems we identified in that review](https://github.com/w3ctag/design-reviews/issues/723#issuecomment-1944367149), though the request doesn't say either way. If we have that wrong, please document how this change does fix some of the identified problems, and we'll be happy to reopen this review.

If you'd like us to analyze the architectural implications of offloading work to a server that's trustworthy in various ways, please open a separate review about applying that idea to a few more-generally-agreed-on use cases.

-- 
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
https://github.com/w3ctag/design-reviews/issues/1009#issuecomment-2489696097
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.

Message ID: <w3ctag/design-reviews/issues/1009/2489696097@github.com>