+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/1143f224-0417-465e-961e-31d74a66c791n%40chromium.org.
