W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-webappsec@w3.org > November 2018

Re: CfC to adopt Feature Policy (deadline Nov. 7th)

From: Oda, Terri <terri.oda@intel.com>
Date: Tue, 6 Nov 2018 12:03:36 -0800
Message-ID: <CACoC0R_sMFh3usyVpBjuX7HKLZG9=i37z32LtDLNvJGvs+sWUw@mail.gmail.com>
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>
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

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 November 2018 20:05:56 UTC