- From: Oda, Terri <terri.oda@intel.com>
- Date: Tue, 6 Nov 2018 12:03:36 -0800
- To: Mike West <mkwst@google.com>
- Cc: public-webappsec@w3.org, iclelland@google.com, Dan Veditz <dveditz@mozilla.com>, weiler@w3.org, Wendy Seltzer <wseltzer@w3.org>
- Message-ID: <CACoC0R_sMFh3usyVpBjuX7HKLZG9=i37z32LtDLNvJGvs+sWUw@mail.gmail.com>
I'll add my voice to the silent support chorus (since I know it's sometimes nice to have an indicator that someone actually read the email and associated documents): this does indeed look like it fits the charter and I approve of the adoption. For those who haven't clicked the links, a quick summary: Feature Policy is coming out of the Web Platform Incubator Community Group and defines a mechanism for developers to enable/disable browser features and APIs. It matches up pretty well with how things are enabled/disabled in Content Security Policy, and gives policy options that are not entirely unlike permissions on modern smartphones (camera, geolocation, etc.), only with a more web-oriented look into origin-based controls (e.g. only example.com gets to use the camera) rather than only an on/off button. I'm a bit surprised that this didn't exist already, since I thought I'd sat in on a discussion of something similar with manifests back in TPAC 2014 or so, but it looks familiar in a good way and should fit well with WebAppSec's other specs. Terri On Wed, Oct 31, 2018 at 1:29 AM Mike West <mkwst@google.com> wrote: > Hey folks! > > As discussed at TPAC > <https://www.w3.org/2018/10/23-webappsec-minutes.html#item08>, there's > interest in migrating Feature Policy > <https://wicg.github.io/feature-policy/> out of the WICG, and into > WebAppSec. There were no objections at the time, with general agreement > that it fit into our existing charter's scope > <https://www.w3.org/2011/webappsec/charter-2017.html> pretty cleanly. I'd > like to make sure the rest of the group feels similarly. > > This, therefore, is a call for consensus regarding Feature Policy's > adoption into this working group. If you have any concerns with this > adoption, please respond here by November 7th. Silence will be interpreted > as support. :) > > If we generally agree to adopt the deliverable, the next steps will be to > send an Intent to Migrate > <https://wicg.github.io/admin/intent-to-migrate.html> to the WICG, and to > move into another CfC to publish the incubated document as a FPWD. Ah, > process... > > Thanks! > > -mike >
Received on Tuesday, 6 November 2018 20:05:55 UTC