#1239: Other Spec Review: CRA web browser standard

Visit on Github

Opened Jun 16, 2026

We have a new full draft. Please review. It would be best if comments were delivered within 2-4 weeks via a labs issue, as Simone delivered previously. Apologies for this request being not well formatted.

Specification

https://labs.etsi.org/rep/stan4cra/en-304-617/-/blob/main_publish/EN-304-617.md?ref_type=heads

Explainer

https://

Links

  • Previous early design review, if any: https://github.com/w3ctag/design-reviews/issues/####
  • An introduction to the feature, aimed at unfamiliar audiences: https:// <!-- Can be the specification's or explainer's introduction, or another section. -->
  • A description of the problems that end-users were facing before this proposal: https:// <!-- See https://w3ctag.github.io/explainer-explainer/#end-user-need -->
  • Alternatives considered: https:// <!-- See https://w3ctag.github.io/explainer-explainer/#alternatives -->
  • Examples of how to use the proposal to solve the end-users' problems: https:// <!-- See https://w3ctag.github.io/explainer-explainer/#describe-proposal -->
  • What do the end-users experience with this proposal: https:// <!-- See https://w3ctag.github.io/explainer-explainer/#describe-proposal -->
  • User research you did to validate the problem and/or design, if any: https://
  • Web Platform Tests: <!-- Or other tests if this is not a web platform feature. -->

The specification

Where and by whom is the work is being done?

  • GitHub repo: https://labs.etsi.org/rep/stan4cra/en-304-617/-/blob/main_publish/EN-304-617.md?ref_type=heads
  • Primary contacts: Daniel Thompson (@denjell)
    • $name (@-mention), $organization/s, $role in developing specification
    • <!-- repeat as necessary, we recommend including group chairs and editors in this list -->
  • Organization/project driving the specification:
  • This work is being funded by:
  • Primary standards group developing this feature:
  • Group intended to standardize this work: <!-- if different from the current group -->
  • Incubation and standards groups that have discussed the design:
    • {{ABC CG}} <!-- Include a link to minutes or issues in this group if possible. -->
    • {{DEF WG}}

Please make comments in

https://labs.etsi.org/rep/stan4cra/en-304-617/-/work_items

Feedback so far

  • Multi-stakeholder feedback:
  • Major unresolved issues with or opposition to this specification:
  • Status/issue trackers for implementations: <!-- Include links to [Chrome Status](https://chromestatus.com/), [Mozilla's](https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/), [WebKit's Bugzilla](https://bugs.webkit.org/), and trackers for other implementations if those are known to you. -->

You should also know that...

No response

<!-- Content below this is maintained by @w3c-tag-bot -->

Track conversations at https://tag-github-bot.w3.org/gh/w3ctag/design-reviews/1239

Discussions

Log in to see TAG-private discussions.

Discussed Jun 29, 2026 (See Github)

Heather: Did we decide this was out of scope, or we are unable to participate? Team working on it?

Yves: Simone worked on this from a security perspective.

Heather: Should we say this is individual participation only; not TAG?

Yves: Depends on scope of the review. If it's security related then it's better to have security people work on it.

Heather: So individual contribution is OK? But not TAG?

Yves: I think it would be hard for TAG to come to consensus?

Christian: Is it architectural? Or just definitions? What's the scope of the review request? The entire document?

Heather: Looks like.

Christian: It's very long. Not sure we can do this at all. Think we should decline it, stating we can't do it in that timeframe. I think it's within TAG's scope, but too long for us to process in the timeframe that remains.

Christian: Yves, could you check with the team if/how we can engage with this request, and what the scope is?

Yves: Yep

Christian: I'll send a response in the GitHub thread, and Yves is going to check on it within W3C.

Comment by @christianliebel Jul 1, 2026 (See Github)

@littledan Thanks for sending this to us. What is the expected scope of our review? The entire document, or specific sections?

Discussed Jul 6, 2026 (See Github)

Lola: Heather and Ehsan are assigned to this, but the document is too much for two people. If we can get more people to take a look, especially people who have some knowledge of how security works in browsers. If you are interested, please assign yourself in the issue or on Slack. Note that this is not the whole of the CRA, and the authors were asked to use the W3C's user agent defintion and explicitly chose not to.

Christian: We have asked the submitter what kind of review they need.

Lola: The submitter won't likely offer a response because his paid engagement with this work has ended. Recommend instead that we just do the best we can with the people who volunteer.

Comment by @littledan Jul 14, 2026 (See Github)

The entire document.

Comment by @littledan Jul 22, 2026 (See Github)

The final version to review is https://labs.etsi.org/rep/stan4cra/en-304-617/-/raw/main_publish/CRA_Vertical_hEN_Browsers-jul6.pdf . Thank you for your comments here!