krgovind

We are organizing a call at TPAC on September 27, and are soliciting agenda items on #235.

Interesting idea! If I remember correctly, @eligrey has asked about such a capability in the past during PrivacyCG discussions.

Thanks for the idea, @alancutter. This sounds similar to the proposal in #46, could you confirm? If yes, may we continue the discussion on that issue?

Posting on behalf of @AnalyticsElTiempo as shared in #146 -- Company: El Tiempo Casa Editorial, a media conglomerate and owner of El Tiempo, the largest circulated daily newspaper in Colombia....

Re-posting @nlozanoarguelles' message from #153, since it's relevant to this discussion. -- Hello, I am the Data Director of [Prisa Media](https://www.prisa.com/), one of the largest media groups providing Spanish-speaking content....

Thanks for the feedback! As we think about how to operationalize the policy, we’ll take this into consideration. For now, I'm tagging this issue with the ua_policy label and leaving...

> Therefore a single controller that can provide all the services itself needed to operate a service is advantaged compared to a single controller that must rely on other parties...

@jagadeeshaby Thanks for the question. Note that, assuming that `outlook.com`, `sage.com`, and `pipeline.com` are valid [sites](https://web.dev/same-site-same-origin/#site); the set would actually have to include those sites. This will automatically treat all...

> in such case does it make sense for enterprise customer to define local FPS with `www.enterprisecustomer.saasapp.com` and `www.enterprisecustomer.saasapp.com`? I think you meant define local FPS with `enterprisecustomer.com` and `saasapp.com`,...

Thanks for sharing your feedback, @nlozanoarguelles. I have re-posted your comment to #93, since we are tracking feedback on the numeric limit in that issue. > Consideration could be given...