Publish minutes of 2022-01-06 meeting #142
Merged
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
The most recent meeting featured a copy-pasted note spanning multiple lines inside a list item. This was not recognized by the export tool.
dotproto
requested changes
Jan 6, 2022
Rob--W
force-pushed
the
meeting-2022-01-06
branch
from
07b3aa5
to
319add9
Compare
|
@dotproto I've updated the source in Google Docs with your suggestions and exported again. The diff between your last review and the update is at https://github.com/w3c/webextensions/compare/07b3aa54cf7d71364498ab92af86984ca1e013e0..319add9a2932aef96e07b04ce45db3a73a4de4b0 (I've also included a link to Oliver's proposal in the doc for future reference). |
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.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.
Generated from https://docs.google.com/document/d/1QkwhEMtMS67JBUkl_WVPZ4lRSKoWcQNlLJSf_GwSXg8/edit using the tool and process from #105.
During this meeting we discussed or mentioned #134, #139 and #12. Although added to the agenda, we did not discuss #115 because @carlosjeurissen was not present to elaborate on the reason for adding it to the agenda again.
@dotproto started the meeting with a proposal of how he'd like to run the meeting, for which he'll file a new issue. He also elaborated on DOM-based use cases that started in the last meeting (part of #120).
@oliverdunk mentioned that he's working on an early proposal to access the keychain to support password managers. We may see a new issue filed if the proposal becomes more concrete.