Change permissions policy feature name to "storage-access" (fixes #104) #105
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
…acycg#104) This was discussed before in privacycg#12 and there was some valid concern around the "storage-access" name based on the fact that this PP feature is more focused on "requesting" storage access, and there is no delegation mechanism like with other permissions that would make it semantically consistent. However, I think that in light of privacycg#32 and the possibility of integrating with the permissions API (giving us important functionality such as observing when storage access is granted) it seems more useful to be consistent with the (future) permission name and call both "storage-access".
|
Merging this given lack of concerns, happy to discuss in another issue. |
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
This was discussed before in #12 and there was some valid concern around
the "storage-access" name based on the fact that this PP feature is more
focused on "requesting" storage access, and there is no delegation
mechanism like with other permissions that would make it semantically
consistent.
However, I think that in light of #32 and the possibility of integrating
with the permissions API (giving us important functionality such as
observing when storage access is granted) it seems more useful to be
consistent with the (future) permission name and call both "storage-access".
Preview | Diff