"first party context" section concerns

[pes10k]

This issue is being filed as part of the requested PING review and was broken off from this previous issue

The sub-section on "first party contexts" is doubly confusing.

• do the authors mean same domain or same site (i.e., same eTLD+1)? The text uses these terms interchangeably, but they mean different things.
• Is the site restricted to only first-party contexts, or available to first-parties by default, but able to be extended / delegated to third-parties? The first paragraph implies the former, and the second paragraph suggests the latter

[kenchris]

Thanks for pointing it out. The section is from the time when Google worked on this spec and we missed updating this part. All the algorithms use the same-origin-domain check so we do same domain and not eTLD+1.

I updated the spec text (see associated PR 207), but I have to go closely through the spec algorithms to make sure this is correctly spec'ed as I noticed that a check is missing for workers.

[anssiko]

(This issue once addressed should also close #179.)

[anssiko]

With #207 all occurrences of the undefined "first-party context" concept are now replaced with and reconstructed using the following normatively defined concepts:

• Picture-in-Picture: initiator of an active picture-in-picture-session
• Media Capture: context is capturing
• HTML: system focus, child navigables

I believe the concern raised in this issue has been addressed, thus I'm closing this issue. Thanks @pes10k for flagging this one and helping remove this undefined concept from the spec that was an unfortunate leftover from the earlier version.

(I've opened #215 to track the same-origin check for workers separately.)