Clarify “non-consensus features”

[hlflanagan]

An explainer exists to help a group find consensus on an idea. Given that, I’m not sure what “non-consensus features” (see 3.3. Describe Your Proposal Clearly ) means in the context of this document.

[jyasskin]

+1 for clarifying the document. The intended meaning was to refer to features where a group hasn't yet found consensus. So, for example, Web Bluetooth has an explainer and a specification but hasn't found consensus outside of Chromium. If someone writes an explainer for an addition to the current Web Bluetooth design, they should mention in the explainer that it depends on the non-consensus Web Bluetooth feature. Sometimes there are explainers on top of two or three layers of non-consensus features, and it's nice to be able to see how far beyond consensus an explainer is reaching.

There might be nuance here: Web Bluetooth has active opposition from the other engines. Other features, maybe including FedCM, have more neutrality, but still don't have active implementation work outside of 1 codebase. I'm not sure explainer authors will reliably describe the nuance here, but we could ask them to try if we want.