-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 157
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Move Document Policy #411
Comments
We could do that... I thought that I remembered discussing that at TPAC2019, and that the sense at the time was that it wasn't necessary, but I don't see that represented in the official minutes at all. The spec currently sits as an editor's draft in this repo, and is not represented in the WebAppSec charter. It should probably move, either into its own w3c/webappsec-document-policy repo, or to WICG, depending on whether there is consensus to adopt the work. @mikewest, @dveditz -- as chairs, is this something that should be handled in a teleconference, or on the mailing list? |
Discussion on the WebAppSec teleconference concluded that this can probably be incubated at WICG, and perhaps brought back to this group in the future. |
It turns out this is not the first time this has been discussed; my memory clearly failed me. I proposed this on the WICG discourse back in May. It appears that WICG may have a new process since then; I'll look into the current correct way to advance that. |
Opened WICG/proposals#15 to propose moving to WICG. |
This removes the document policy spec and associated machinery from this repository, and updates references to point to the new location at WICG. A redirect is put in place from the old spec location to the new one. Closes: #411
I've moved the spec and explainer to the new location at WICG, migrated all of the relevant issues, and updated links here to point to the new repo and/or spec as appropriate. If you see anything else stale, feel free to open an issue or PR to get it updated. |
As mentioned in passing in whatwg/xhr#295 I think it would be better for it to be in its own repository. Also, as it's a new thing it should probably be incubated first?
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: