Thanks Rakina - right now the biggest blocker is the unlanded spec PR. Things should move pretty quickly once that's resolved.

On 1/10/24 11:15 PM, Rakina Zata Amni wrote:
> Hoping that the design doc can become an GH explainer with the usual format, as the design doc doesn't answer questions in the strucutre we like to see

Can you clarify which part isn't answered yet in the explainer <https://github.com/fergald/explainer-messageport-close/blob/main/README.md>?

From the list in your link:

  * The user-facing problem which needs to be solved;
      o Covered by this section
        
<https://github.com/fergald/explainer-messageport-close/blob/main/README.md#background>.
  * The proposed approach to solving the problem;
      o Covered by this section
        
<https://github.com/fergald/explainer-messageport-close/blob/main/README.md#proposal>.
  * The way the proposed solution may be used in practice to address
    the intended use cases, via example code;
      o Pretty much covered by this section
        
<https://github.com/fergald/explainer-messageport-close/blob/main/README.md#proposal>
 although
        there's no actual code example. We will add the code example
        (basically just an event listener using the close event)
  * Any other venues (such as mailing list, pull requests or issue
    threads external to the location of the explainer) where the
    reader may catch up on discussions regarding the proposed feature
    or features;
      o The issue <https://github.com/whatwg/html/issues/1766> is
        linked from the explainer.
  * The alternatives which have already been considered and why they
    were not chosen;
      o Covered by this section
        
<https://github.com/fergald/explainer-messageport-close/blob/main/README.md#alternatives-considered>.
  * Accessibility, security and privacy implications which have been
    considered as part of the design process.
      o Security & Privacy is covered by this sectio
        
<https://github.com/fergald/explainer-messageport-close/blob/main/README.md#tag-security--privacy-questionnaire-answers>n,
        and there is no accessibility implication introduced by the
        new event.


Please let us know if there are any parts that need further clarification.

(BTW just to update the thread, the TAG review <https://github.com/w3ctag/design-reviews/issues/923> has been requested last month)

On Thu, Jan 4, 2024 at 1:49 AM Alex Russell <slightly...@chromium.org> wrote:

    +1 to Yoav's excitement about this. Thank you for pushing it forward.

    On TAG review, we're living in hope that the newly-expanded TAG
    will have more bandwidth and focus for reviews, but as Mike says,
    we're increasingly timing out. Filing for review at I2P time is
    always the pro-move, and I it's a bad look for us to be leaving it
    to late regardless.

    Hoping that the design doc can become an GH explainer with the
    usual format, as the design doc doesn't answer questions in the
    strucutre we like to see:

    https://w3ctag.org/explainers/

    Best,

    Alex

    On Wednesday, December 13, 2023 at 8:46:20 AM UTC-8 Mike Taylor wrote:

        Gentle reminder to request approvals for the other review
        gates in chromestatus, thanks.

        On 12/1/23 1:05 PM, Mike Taylor wrote:

        On 11/30/23 10:56 PM, Fergal Daly wrote:

        On Wednesday, November 29, 2023 at 2:23:12 PM UTC+9 Yoav
        Weiss wrote:


                On Tue, 28 Nov 2023 at 12:31, Nonoka Muraki
                <murakinon...@chromium.org> wrote:
                TAG review

                Not needed because This is a small feature where we
                just dispatch a new event.


            Unfortunately that's not a criteria for skipping a TAG
            review. Can you file one?


        I'm concerned by this because every TAG review I've seen in
        the last couple of years has taken months to get a response.
        If our own privacy review is positive and we have agreement
        with other vendors would we block on the TAG review?
        In practice, we don't block on TAG reviews, but we like to
        give them a chance to review or comment within a reasonable
        time period (typically a week or two).


--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"blink-dev" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to blink-dev+unsubscr...@chromium.org.
To view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/a/chromium.org/d/msgid/blink-dev/7f7a2d3c-876e-4fec-bd36-254846cb6261%40chromium.org.

Reply via email to