Ehsan Karamad

Thanks you are right. I fixed the missing single quotes for `self`.

> Any way to detect whether the browser supports this feature or not? > So we can use other lazy load libraries in case it doesn't ? I think on...

> Doesn't this feature have a really confusing name? I agree the name is confusing; it is supposed to suggest the *full control over the `lazyload` attribute*, i.e., of disabled...

Closed by accident :).

There is a [PR](https://github.com/w3c/webappsec-feature-policy/pull/293) which would rework and rename the proposed `lazyload` policy. The new policy modifies the default/`auto` behavior of the `loading` [attribute](https://github.com/whatwg/html/pull/3752). The new name is `loading-frame-default-eager` and...

> @ehsan-karamad > > Both the [loading-frame-default-eager.md](https://github.com/w3c/webappsec-feature-policy/blob/master/policies/loading-frame-default-eager.md) and [loading-image-default-eager.md](https://github.com/w3c/webappsec-feature-policy/blob/master/policies/loading-image-default-eager.md) documents seem to be missing some sentencing in the "What does this mean" section: > > > With the `loading-frame-default-eager` policy,...

The explainer mostly discusses CSS-defined animations. I am reviving this thread to get insights into expansion of the feature to do even more. 1. **WebAnimation API**: I think the feature...

Yes, the same explainer document. Thanks for the feedback. Interesting point! I don't think it will become "mandatory" by any means, but it can be come a customizeable feature where...

Thanks for posting here as well. I think the explainer needs revisions (as also requested in issue w3c/webappsec-permissions-policy#203). I will try to respond to the concerns in line. Hopefully more...

> On the contrary, I think we very much want behavior to be consistent between browsers. Yes, this is exactly what I meant (sorry for convoluted wording). > I'm still...