Relationship with permissions spec

[benfredwells]

This (feature policy) spec redefined permissions that are defined in the permissions api spec. Could this spec link to the permission api spec instead, so adding permissions (e.g. bluetooth, contacts, whatever we dream of next) doesn't require both specs to be updated?

[raymeskhoury]

I think @jyasskin was thinking about the relationship between the 2 specs somewhat.

[jyasskin]

The list of features has to live somewhere, and both specs need to refer to it. It doesn't matter very much which spec it goes in; there will always be some new things that require updating two places.

[igrigorik]

Can we close this? It doesn't seem like there is anything actionable here.

[alvestrand]

Can't be closed until we have consensus on where the list lives. @foolip may have opinions.

[foolip]

If a single list makes sense I don't have an opinion about where it lives, as long as it's in an actively maintained spec where getting changes made is easy enough.

https://w3c.github.io/permissions/#permission-registry exists and already claims to be a registry, but https://wicg.github.io/feature-policy/#features has things like sync-xhr which aren't and never will be permissions in the user-facing sense.

So concretely, what's to be done? Maybe just make sure there isn't any accidental divergence between the lists?

[igrigorik]

FWIW, you can see where I'm headed here: https://cdn.rawgit.com/WICG/feature-policy/idl/index.html#features. The list of "features" will be a superset of the keywords covered by PermissionName enum... as such, I'm not sure if and how we want coordinate here.

One route would be for the Permissions spec to link to the relevant keywords in FP?

[igrigorik]

@benfredwells @jyasskin we've revamped the proposal in #27 -- ptal and chime in there. Closing this.

[alvestrand]

@igrigorik can you give the correct link? #27 is this bug.

[igrigorik]

Oops, apologies: #43

[alvestrand]

@igrigorik I can't find an explanation of the relationship to the permissions spec in the explainer at https://docs.google.com/document/d/1k0Ua-ZWlM_PsFCFdLMa8kaVTo32PeNZ4G7FFHqpFx4E/edit#heading=h.4yubgixv5l6b - in particular, there is no explicit reference to the permissions spec, so I'm not 100% sure that's what's being referenced in the section on "how are features disabled".

I added comments on the explainer for other stuff.