Skip to content
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

[Feature Policy] should not control exposure of navigator.xr #823

Closed
ddorwin opened this issue Sep 4, 2019 · 3 comments · Fixed by #842
Closed

[Feature Policy] should not control exposure of navigator.xr #823

ddorwin opened this issue Sep 4, 2019 · 3 comments · Fixed by #842
Labels
feature policy All things related to Feature Policy fixed by pending PR A PR that is in review will resolve this issue. potential breaking change Issues that may affect the core design structure.

Comments

@ddorwin
Copy link
Contributor

ddorwin commented Sep 4, 2019

https://immersive-web.github.io/webxr/#feature-policy currently says that the "policy-controlled feature... controls whether the xr attribute is exposed on the Navigator object."

According to @clelland, controlling exposure of an IDL member is not a common pattern (context). For consistency with other APIs, the feature check should probably be moved to the top-level methods on the navigator.xr object.


FWIW, the decision to use "xr" was somewhat motivated (i.e., #308 (comment) and related conversations) by the simplicity of not exposing the xr attribute. Changing how the control works would enable make other options possible, though that's not required or blocking this change.

@ddorwin ddorwin changed the title Feature Policy should not control exposure of the navigator.xr Feature Policy should not control exposure of navigator.xr Sep 4, 2019
@Manishearth Manishearth added this to the September 2019 milestone Sep 5, 2019
@toji toji changed the title Feature Policy should not control exposure of navigator.xr [Feature Policy] should not control exposure of navigator.xr Sep 5, 2019
@NellWaliczek NellWaliczek assigned toji and unassigned toji Sep 5, 2019
@NellWaliczek NellWaliczek added face-to-face feature policy All things related to Feature Policy labels Sep 5, 2019
@toji toji added the agenda Request discussion in the next telecon/FTF label Sep 10, 2019
@toji
Copy link
Member

toji commented Sep 10, 2019

Thanks for bringing attention to this issue! I'd like to take some time at TPAC to discuss the group's approach to feature policy now and in the future, but prior to that I've put together a doc that outlines what the editors have discussed. It would be great if anyone with an interest in the topic can read through and either leave comments or be prepared to discuss at TPAC:

https://docs.google.com/document/d/1RZTL69JsTxoJUyXNnu_2v0PPILqrDpYW3ZxDjMAqQ-M/edit?usp=sharing

@NellWaliczek NellWaliczek added the potential breaking change Issues that may affect the core design structure. label Sep 11, 2019
@AdaRoseCannon
Copy link
Member

Removing from the Agenda since it was addresses Face-to-face at TPAC, feel free to re-agenda.

@AdaRoseCannon AdaRoseCannon removed the agenda Request discussion in the next telecon/FTF label Sep 18, 2019
@probot-label
Copy link

probot-label bot commented Sep 21, 2019

This issue is fixed by PR #842

@probot-label probot-label bot added the fixed by pending PR A PR that is in review will resolve this issue. label Sep 21, 2019
@toji toji closed this as completed in #842 Sep 26, 2019
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
feature policy All things related to Feature Policy fixed by pending PR A PR that is in review will resolve this issue. potential breaking change Issues that may affect the core design structure.
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging a pull request may close this issue.

5 participants