Yoav, Protected Audiences has been fortunate to have a ton of design contributions and feedback, but consequently has a lot of issues filed. We try to respond to all issues, as you can see by the discussion comments on nearly all issues. I went through and triaged all the issues recently. I closed many of them, created some labels and labeled many of them. Here’s where I think the open issues stand:
- 65 <https://github.com/WICG/turtledove/labels/Non-breaking%20Feature%20Request> I labeled “Non-breaking Feature Request”, meaning they’re requesting new functionality that is unlikely to cause backwards compatibility issues. - 29 <https://github.com/WICG/turtledove/labels/spec> are spec related. As Dominic said above, most of these changes are unlikely to break web content. - 8 <https://github.com/WICG/turtledove/labels/Looking%20for%20feedback> are seeking feedback rather than pointing to a problem. - 4 <https://github.com/WICG/turtledove/labels/compat%20concern> could potentially break compatibility. I think for all of these we’ve decided to not adopt the proposed changes or we’ve decided to adopt the proposed changes but as part of our longer-term plans in the future. I should note that recently we adopted many breaking changes to our API, but did so in a way that supports backwards compatibility, so we can wean developers off of the old APIs without causing immediate significant breakage. If we chose to adopt some of these changes, I imagine we could do so in a similar non-breaking way. - 86 <https://github.com/WICG/turtledove/issues?q=is%3Aopen+-label%3A%22Non-breaking+Feature+Request%22++-label%3Aspec+-label%3A%22Looking+for+feedback%22+-label%3A%22compat+concern%22> didn’t fit well into a particular category: - Some were questions seeking to clarify details of our timeline or the explainer or design. - Some were discussions that are mostly addressed but left open so we don’t forget about remaining pieces. - Some are open discussions or examples. I think it’s worth noting that our usage of the issue system differs from those of many other folks who ship features: We tend to use the issues as open forums as opposed to only leaving open issues that need to have decisions made. Many of the issues predate the FLEDGE explainer and represent design discussions that culminated in FLEDGE’s design. I hope the labels I added make it clearer which are future enhancements and not likely to break backwards compatibility. I honestly think over the years before our Origin Trial and over the course of our lengthy Origin Trial we’ve addressed all the feedback for core functionality in Protected Audience and don’t anticipate breaking backwards compatibility in significant ways. On Thu, Jun 22, 2023 at 3:56 AM Yoav Weiss <yoavwe...@chromium.org> wrote: > Glancing at the open issues, I see 291 of them > <https://github.com/WICG/turtledove/issues?page=2&q=is%3Aopen>.. Would it > be possible to go over the issues and label them so that it's clearer which > are about future enhancements, which are editorial and which may have an > impact on the processing model or API shape in ways that can impact future > compatibility? > > On Wed, Jun 21, 2023 at 8:00 PM Dominic Farolino <d...@chromium.org> wrote: > >> As the spec mentor for this feature I'll offer a spec maturity summary >> <https://www.chromium.org/blink/launching-features/#:~:text=If%20your%20specification%20isn%27t%20a%20modification%20of%20an%20existing%20specification%2C%20include%20a%20one%2Dline%20spec%20maturity%20summary%20from%20someone%20outside%20your%20team%20(like%20your%20spec%20mentor)%20who%20has%20done%20a%20review.>. >> @Jeffrey Yasskin <jyass...@chromium.org> and I reviewed the spec in >> detail recently and were pleased with the improvements that the team worked >> with us to make recently, especially with regards to: >> >> - >> >> Formalizing the interaction with times and dates >> - >> >> Adding rigor to the in parallel work (and its interaction with the >> main thread and the Script Runner realms) >> - >> >> Fetch integration >> - >> >> Specifying the conversions from internal spec data to JS objects when >> calling into the Script Runners >> <https://wicg.github.io/turtledove/#script-runners>, mostly by >> increasing the use of WebIDL >> >> In a few of these points there is still work to be done, and we've been >> filing >> bugs <https://github.com/WICG/turtledove/labels/spec> against the >> specification for individual tasks that the team has committed to making >> progress on in the very near future. The spec overall is not yet very >> readable <https://github.com/WICG/turtledove/issues/646>, which means >> external reviewers will have to spend time to understand the flow before >> they can give substantive feedback. From a completeness perspective, the >> spec still has over a dozen "TODOs" (I expect that they’ll be finished soon >> given how many have recently closed), including the bulk of the integration >> with Fenced Frames <https://github.com/WICG/turtledove/pull/616>, whose >> completion might help other browser engines notice new interoperability >> issues. The team is completing these at a good pace, but this implies that >> in addition to finishing pieces of the spec that document the current >> implementation, there will probably be minor web-visible changes after >> shipping in M115. However, most of these changes are unlikely to break web >> content, and if anything bigger comes up, the Privacy Sandbox's general >> tools for migrating their users should be effective. >> >> >> On Tue, Jun 20, 2023 at 4:06 PM Paul Jensen <pauljen...@chromium.org> >> wrote: >> >>> *Contact emails* >>> >>> pauljen...@chromium.org, kle...@google.com, ajvelasq...@google.com >>> >>> Explainer >>> >>> https://github.com/WICG/turtledove/blob/master/FLEDGE.m >>> <https://github.com/WICG/turtledove/blob/master/FLEDGE.md>d >>> >>> Specification >>> >>> https://wicg.github.io/turtledove >>> >>> Summary >>> >>> The Protected Audience API (formerly known as FLEDGE) provides a method >>> of interest-group advertising without having to track individual users’ >>> detailed browsing history as is done today with third-party cookies. >>> Additional advantages over cookies include time limits on group membership, >>> better user controls, and more user transparency. >>> >>> Blink component >>> >>> Blink>InterestGroups >>> <https://bugs.chromium.org/p/chromium/issues/list?q=component%3ABlink%3EInterestGroups&can=2> >>> >>> TAG review >>> >>> https://github.com/w3ctag/design-reviews/issues/723 >>> >>> TAG review status >>> >>> Pending since March 2022 >>> >>> Risks >>> Compatibility >>> >>> This is not a breaking change. To use it, sites will need to call the >>> Protected Audience API. There is no change to existing behavior for sites >>> not calling the API. It’s worth noting that the spec uses WebIDL to >>> describe the script runners >>> <https://wicg.github.io/turtledove/#script-runners> but the >>> implementation does not. There may be minor compat issues as we align the >>> implementation with the WebIDL semantics over time. >>> >>> Interoperability >>> >>> Gecko: No signal, requested March 2023 >>> <https://github.com/mozilla/standards-positions/issues/770> >>> >>> WebKit: No signal, requested March 2023 >>> <https://github.com/WebKit/standards-positions/issues/158> >>> >>> Edge: Edge explored interest group based advertising, namely with the >>> PARAKEET proposal >>> <https://github.com/WICG/privacy-preserving-ads/blob/main/Parakeet.md>. >>> PARAKEET shares much of its API with Protected Audience but as >>> discussed in TPAC 2022 >>> <https://docs.google.com/presentation/d/1QQgrm4oaRRRBr1gfvKj7D8rS2EW8kRgRUHPscvR8BNo/edit#slide=id.g15545e7b627_0_173>, >>> involves proxying data to non-trusted servers in real-time whereas >>> Protected Audience does not have long term plans to do this. >>> >>> Web developers: Significant interest from many web developers. Significant >>> Origin Trial participation >>> <https://github.com/WICG/turtledove/blob/main/fledge-tester-list.md>. WICG >>> FLEDGE calls <https://github.com/WICG/turtledove/issues/88> are heavily >>> attended. Interest in Protected Audience is further evidenced by the many >>> related discussions and proposals that Protected Audience’s design >>> draws from, most notably: >>> >>> - >>> >>> The original TURTLEDOVE >>> <https://github.com/WICG/turtledove/blob/main/Original-TURTLEDOVE.md> >>> from Chrome. >>> - >>> >>> SPARROW <https://github.com/WICG/sparrow> from Criteo. >>> - >>> >>> Outcome-based TURTLEDOVE >>> <https://github.com/WICG/turtledove/blob/main/OUTCOME_BASED.md> and >>> Product-level >>> TURTLEDOVE >>> <https://github.com/WICG/turtledove/blob/main/PRODUCT_LEVEL.md> from >>> RTB House. >>> - >>> >>> Dovekey >>> <https://github.com/google/ads-privacy/tree/master/proposals/dovekey> >>> from Google Ads. >>> - >>> >>> PARRROT >>> >>> <https://github.com/prebid/identity-gatekeeper/blob/master/proposals/PARRROT.md> >>> from Magnite. >>> - >>> >>> TERN <https://github.com/WICG/turtledove/blob/main/TERN.md> from >>> NextRoll. >>> >>> >>> Demo link >>> https://developer.chrome.com/docs/privacy-sandbox/fledge-api/#demo >>> Debuggability >>> >>> To learn more about debugging Protected Audience in Chrome please follow >>> these links: https://developer.chrome.com/blog/fledge-api/#debugging >>> https://developer.chrome.com/blog/fledge-api/#observe-fledge-events >>> >>> Will this feature be supported on all six Blink platforms (Windows, Mac, >>> Linux, Chrome OS, Android, and Android WebView)? >>> >>> All except WebView >>> >>> Is this feature fully tested by web-platform-tests >>> <https://chromium.googlesource.com/chromium/src/+/main/docs/testing/web_platform_tests.md> >>> ? >>> >>> We've tested all of the primary functionality in WPT. This API has a lot >>> of surface area and so we're continuing to add platform tests over time. >>> >>> https://wpt.fyi/results/?q=fledge >>> >>> Flag name >>> >>> >>> InterestGroupStorage,AdInterestGroupAPI,Fledge,AllowURNsInIframes,BiddingAndScoringDebugReportingAPI >>> >>> Requires code in //chrome? >>> >>> Yes, for settings UI controls and k-anonymity server communication. >>> >>> Estimated milestones >>> >>> Has been in Origin Trial since M101. We intend to start an incremental >>> ramp to 100% in Stable with Chrome Release M115. >>> >>> Anticipated spec changes >>> >>> - >>> >>> We’re addressing some remaining TODOs and specifying some recently >>> added non-breaking features (e.g. #304 >>> <https://github.com/WICG/turtledove/issues/304>, #305 >>> <https://github.com/WICG/turtledove/issues/305>, #310 >>> <https://github.com/WICG/turtledove/issues/310>, #166 >>> <https://github.com/WICG/turtledove/issues/166>). >>> - >>> >>> Moving beyond our core use cases, we anticipate the need to support >>> new functionality going forward. We don’t currently anticipate changes >>> that would break backwards compatibility. >>> - >>> >>> Support for Bidding and Auction services >>> >>> <https://groups.google.com/a/chromium.org/g/blink-dev/c/bGd_nPuUrUg/m/j39WQ7e2AwAJ> >>> is in progress. This is a non-breaking additional feature. >>> >>> >>> Link to entry on the Chrome Platform Status >>> >>> https://chromestatus.com/feature/5733583115255808 >>> >>> Links to previous Intent discussions >>> >>> Intent to Prototype: >>> >>> https://groups.google.com/a/chromium.org/g/blink-dev/c/w9hm8eQCmNI >>> >>> Intent to Experiment: >>> >>> >>> https://groups.google.com/a/chromium.org/g/blink-dev/c/0VmMSsDWsFg/m/_0T5qleqCgAJ >>> >>> Intent to Extend Origin Trial: >>> >>> >>> https://groups.google.com/a/chromium.org/g/blink-dev/c/SD8Ot2gpz4g/m/A9uA-_cGAwAJ >>> >>> >>> >>> https://groups.google.com/a/chromium.org/g/blink-dev/c/gpmaOi3of_w/m/SyMclFhMAAAJ >>> >>> >>> https://groups.google.com/a/chromium.org/g/blink-dev/c/CBrV-2DrYFI/m/RTojC6kHAgAJ >>> >>> -- >>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google >>> Groups "blink-dev" group. >>> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send >>> an email to blink-dev+unsubscr...@chromium.org. >>> To view this discussion on the web visit >>> https://groups.google.com/a/chromium.org/d/msgid/blink-dev/CABQTWrn8eM3wOtUY3RzmDrt7SVxR_y_6Fo02bJ%2BF1bzbwpFfkQ%40mail.gmail.com >>> <https://groups.google.com/a/chromium.org/d/msgid/blink-dev/CABQTWrn8eM3wOtUY3RzmDrt7SVxR_y_6Fo02bJ%2BF1bzbwpFfkQ%40mail.gmail.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer> >>> . >>> >> -- >> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups >> "blink-dev" group. >> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an >> email to blink-dev+unsubscr...@chromium.org. >> To view this discussion on the web visit >> https://groups.google.com/a/chromium.org/d/msgid/blink-dev/CAP-uykDhn3EzgNacgnEExhiLwrdnc%2Bf7ZV6qMf%3DHk1ns1oHdTw%40mail.gmail.com >> <https://groups.google.com/a/chromium.org/d/msgid/blink-dev/CAP-uykDhn3EzgNacgnEExhiLwrdnc%2Bf7ZV6qMf%3DHk1ns1oHdTw%40mail.gmail.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer> >> . >> > -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "blink-dev" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to blink-dev+unsubscr...@chromium.org. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/a/chromium.org/d/msgid/blink-dev/CABQTWrntW-niM56ucvC90ig%2BtD4M8_Nv1y1B1Sa%2BCu%3DsLr8nig%40mail.gmail.com.
