Re: [blink-dev] Intent to Ship: CSS font-size-adjust with the two-value syntax

re about WPT test coverage at the > moment (it's likely small), but for the time being I believe we can align > with Safari and FF. ChangSeok, do you agree? > > > > Dominik > > > > > > On Tue, May 21, 2024 at 3:43 PM Philip Jägenstedt > wrote: > > Hi Chan

Re: [blink-dev] Intent to Ship: CSS font-size-adjust with the two-value syntax

On Wed, May 22, 2024 at 10:00 PM ChangSeok Oh wrote: > Hi Philip, > > I noticed that font-size-adjust-012.html, font-size-adjust-013.html, and > parts of font-size-adjust-computed.html (e.g., ch-width and ic-width) show > minor deviations from expected results. The exact issue with the WPT Linux

Re: [blink-dev] Re: Intent to Ship: Compute Pressure

On Tue, May 21, 2024 at 9:39 AM Raphael Kubo da Costa wrote: > > Op 17-05-2024 om 16:59 schreef Philip Jägenstedt: > > What will be the behavior on Android, will the API appear to work but > > never invoke the observer callback? If so, would it make sense to > > disabl

Re: [blink-dev] Intent to Ship: CSS font-size-adjust with the two-value syntax

Hi ChangSeok, Thank you for working on this, it's great to see both more powerful typography control, and progress on Interop 2024. Can you say something about the remaining failures in WPT? font-size-adjust-012.html font-size-adjust-013.html both look like minor differences, but it seems like

Re: [blink-dev] Intent to Ship: Deprecate Mutation Events

Hi Mason, This is quite exciting! Mutation events is something I've long assumed we'd have to live with forever, but your findings here are extremely encouraging. Most compelling to me is (1) your analysis of UKM data and the lack of clear breakage on any of the ~30 checked sites, and (2) that

Re: [blink-dev] Re: Intent to Ship: Compute Pressure

Hi Arnaud, I have a followup question about this. I assumed that the feature wouldn't be enabled on Android, but judging by Chromium source and wpt.fyi test results, at least the API surface is exposed:

Re: [blink-dev] Intent to Ship: Automatic Fullscreen Content Setting

Hi Mike, I think the use cases here are clear and skipping the user activation requirement is the only way to meet them. I believe that the biggest risk here is content written assuming this setting not working without it, and it being hard to understand why. In other words, debuggability and

Re: [blink-dev] Intent to Prototype and Ship: Align navigator.cookieEnabled with spec

LGTM3 On Tue, Apr 30, 2024 at 6:49 PM Yoav Weiss (@Shopify) < yoavwe...@chromium.org> wrote: > LGTM2 > > On Tue, Apr 30, 2024 at 6:10 PM Rick Byers wrote: > >> Ah good point, thanks. Thanks for your attention to web compat detail >> here. Really any bug fix has the potential to be a significant

Re: [blink-dev] Intent to Ship: Support Cross-Origin Shared Storage Worklets

Hi Yao, I see that https://github.com/WICG/shared-storage/pull/152 is still open, can that be landed before we ship this? Also, can you point to the tests for this change? Best regards, Philip On Fri, Apr 19, 2024 at 9:58 PM Josh Karlin wrote: > > > On Fri, Apr 19, 2024 at 1:59 PM Vladimir

Re: [blink-dev] Intent to Ship: Attribution Reporting Feature Bundle: Additional Verbose Debug Reports, Further Gating Source Verbose Debug Reports, Splitting the Attribution Rate Limit

Hi Akash, Are https://wpt.fyi/results/attribution-reporting all of the tests for this feature and these changes? Do you expect that all of the tests there will be passing? I see that 3 of the tests time out which make it harder to understand the status. Is it possible to make these tests fail

Re: [blink-dev] Intent to Ship: URL.parse()

LGTM3 On Wed, Apr 24, 2024 at 4:46 PM Jxck wrote: > @domenic > > I've updated finch name on ChromeStatus. > > Thanks > Jxck > > On Wednesday, April 24, 2024 at 12:45:52 PM UTC+9 Domenic Denicola wrote: > >> LGTM2 >> >> On Wed, Apr 24, 2024 at 1:50 AM Yoav Weiss (@Shopify) < >>

Re: [blink-dev] Intent to Deprecate and Remove: Deprecate the includeShadowRoots argument on DOMParser

LGTM1 to remove without deprecation I looked through all 24 sites listed in https://chromestatus.com/metrics/feature/timeline/popularity/4455. 23 of them are the code from client-shim.js minified in various ways, and one site no longer has includeShadowRoots. On Wed, Mar 20, 2024 at 5:11 PM Mike

Re: [blink-dev] Intent to Deprecate and Remove: Deprecate the includeShadowRoots argument on DOMParser

We indeed try to avoid open ended deprecation warnings with no planned milestone for removal. Given that the usage is still low (~0.01%) and that you found 8/8 sites analyzed were doing feature detection, this seems fairly low risk. I presume it's OK to gate this removal behind a flag, so that we

Re: [blink-dev] Re: Intent to implement and ship: Allow elements with CSS display:contents to be focusable

The API owners touched on this today. Just a note that we consider it on hold until there's a reply to the questions about accessibility. On Wed, Jan 24, 2024 at 5:48 PM Philip Jägenstedt wrote: > On Wed, Jan 10, 2024 at 5:50 PM David Baron wrote: > >> >> >> On Wed,

Re: [blink-dev] Re: Intent to Ship: Compute Pressure

On Fri, Mar 15, 2024 at 6:42 PM Raphael Kubo da Costa < raphael.kubo.da.co...@intel.com> wrote: > Philip Jägenstedt writes: > > > Taking a closer look, I think it's really because the tests depend on > > MojoJS, and if we exclude tentative tests > > < > http

Re: [blink-dev] Re: Intent to Ship: Compute Pressure

On Fri, Mar 15, 2024 at 4:11 PM Raphael Kubo da Costa < raphael.kubo.da.co...@intel.com> wrote: > Philip Jägenstedt writes: > > > Taking a look at https://wpt.fyi/results/compute-pressure I see that > most > > of the tests are tentative. Should they still be, or why do

Re: [blink-dev] Intent to Ship: Compute Pressure

rguments so please chime in. > > On Thu, Mar 14, 2024 at 11:51 PM Philip Jägenstedt > wrote: > > > > Thank you for sharing aggregated feedback, Ajay. > > > > I couldn't find any discussion about sampleRate vs an interval, so I've > filed https://github.com/w3c/compute-pressur

Re: [blink-dev] Intent to Ship: Compute Pressure

Thank you for sharing aggregated feedback, Ajay. I couldn't find any discussion about sampleRate vs an interval, so I've filed https://github.com/w3c/compute-pressure/issues/253 with all the precedent for and against that I could find. Kenneth, Arnaud, can you look into this and decide whether

Re: [blink-dev] Intent to Ship: Private Aggregation debug mode for auctionReportBuyers reporting

LGTM3 I agree with Alex that we have a bad track record of "temporary" APIs on the web, but I'm comfortable with this given the particulars. A feature which is only a dictionary member is detectable (through a getter) but you have to do extra work and I don't recall ever seeing a problem from

Re: [blink-dev] Intent to ship: MP4 container support for MediaRecorder

LGTM2 I think that https://wpt.fyi/results/mediacapture-record?label=master=experimental=mp4 are the relevant tests. LGTM assuming all of these tests pass with MediaRecorderEnableMp4Muxer enabled. If that's not the case, is there some functionality that won't be supported initially? On Wed, Mar

Re: [blink-dev] Intent to Prototype and Ship: Standardized CSS zoom

LGTM2 On Wed, Feb 14, 2024 at 11:53 PM Daniel Bratell wrote: > > LGTM1 > > /Daniel > > On 2024-02-09 20:24, 'Yotam Hacohen' via blink-dev wrote: > > > > On Thursday, February 8, 2024 at 6:46:00 PM UTC-8 Domenic Denicola wrote: > > On Fri, Feb 9, 2024 at 10:55 AM Yotam Hacohen wrote: > > Hey

Re: [blink-dev] Intent to Ship: Support in Chrome for the VoiceIsolation getUserMedia constraint

LGTM1, some comments inline. On Sat, Feb 3, 2024 at 6:15 AM Per Åhgren wrote: >> >> >> TAG review status >> >> Issues addressed >> This is somewhat at odds with the previous response. :) Did you intend to >> link a TAG review and forget? > > Sorry, my bad. I did not remove this from the

Re: [blink-dev] Intent to Ship: CJK punctuation kerning: the CSS `text-spacing-trim` property

LGTM2 I agree that it makes sense to wait with the shorthand until we support both of the longhand properties. Some developers may be surprised when text-spacing doesn't work but text-spacing-trim does, but it can be feature detected so I don't think it's worth delaying all 3 properties to ship

Re: [blink-dev] Request for Deprecation Trial : HTMLVideoElement-specific Prefixed Fullscreen API

tus entry? It doesn't show up for me. Or >> is this about emailing the list mentioned here >> <https://www.chromium.org/developers/enterprise-changes/#1-give-enterprises-visibility> >> ? >> >> Thanks, >> Thomas >> >> >> >> On Wed, Jan

Re: [blink-dev] Intent to Ship: CJK punctuation kerning: the CSS `text-spacing-trim` property

As a data point, I see that the flag in STP is called "CSS text-spacing property", which suggests all 3 properties behind a single flag. It might not ship together, but it's a good guess. On Thu, Feb 1, 2024 at 12:02 PM Philip Jägenstedt wrote: > Hi Koji, > > Thanks fo

Re: [blink-dev] Intent to Ship: CJK punctuation kerning: the CSS `text-spacing-trim` property

Hi Koji, Thanks for linking the tests, judging just by the test names it looks like many combinations of languages and fonts are tested. Some of the tests are failing though, is that expected? Also, I see that some of the tests don't actually use text-spacing-trim, are those just testing default

Re: [blink-dev] Intent to Ship: Element Reflection

Hi Alice, For testing of these in WPT, do you have some details on what's missing? It's already possible to get the accessible name and role for an element: https://web-platform-tests.org/writing-tests/testdriver.html#accessibility I suspect that won't help, but there's an experimental/tentative

Re: [blink-dev] Request for Deprecation Trial : HTMLVideoElement-specific Prefixed Fullscreen API

Apologies in advance for excessive paperwork, but can you also put https://chromestatus.com/feature/5111638103687168 through the process, requesting enterprise signoff in particular? Enterprise folks could depend on this and might need to take some extra action, and a "Feature deprecation" entry

Re: [blink-dev] Request for Deprecation Trial : HTMLVideoElement-specific Prefixed Fullscreen API

to minimize the work for web authors as they switch away from > the API. > > On Fri, Jan 26, 2024 at 6:26 AM Philip Jägenstedt > wrote: > >> https://sites.google.com/a/chromium.org/dev/blink/launching-features >> doesn't give any guidance on the timeline, so let's just

Re: [blink-dev] Request for Deprecation Trial : HTMLVideoElement-specific Prefixed Fullscreen API

27.1/js/vendor.module.js, one link > is also playing an overlay video intro. > > On Thu, Jan 25, 2024 at 12:25 AM Philip Jägenstedt > wrote: > >> I'm also happy to support a plan to deprecate and remove. The use counter >> that best represents worst-case user impact at >

Re: [blink-dev] Request for Deprecation Trial : HTMLVideoElement-specific Prefixed Fullscreen API

> new feature (titled "Deprecation of HTMLVideoElement-specific Prefixed >>>>>> Fullscreen API")? I think the current ChromeStatus entry also covers this >>>>>> API >>>>>> <https://source.chromium.org/chromium/chromium/src/+/main:third_pa

Re: [blink-dev] Request for Deprecation Trial : HTMLVideoElement-specific Prefixed Fullscreen API

On Thu, Jan 25, 2024 at 2:00 AM Wesley Luyten wrote: > Wesley from Mux here. I saw the issue come by. > > We'd be happy those API's could get deprecated and unified into the new > one. > > Our Media Chrome (library, not browser) implementation handles this > gracefully, some code here > >

Re: [blink-dev] Request for Deprecation Trial : HTMLVideoElement-specific Prefixed Fullscreen API

ack in > Chrome 15, whereas a *deprecation/removal* has a different set of fields, > if I understand correctly. > > >> >> What's a reasonable sample size of HTTP Archive sites to audit? Should >> this be a complement/precursor to the proposed Deprecation Trial, or wou

Re: [blink-dev] Re: Intent to implement and ship: Allow elements with CSS display:contents to be focusable

On Wed, Jan 10, 2024 at 5:50 PM David Baron wrote: > > > On Wed, Jan 10, 2024 at 11:14 AM Yoav Weiss > wrote: > >> >> >> On Tuesday, January 9, 2024 at 5:39:19 PM UTC+1 David Baron wrote: >> >> Contact emailsdba...@chromium.org >> >> ExplainerNone >> >>

Re: [blink-dev] Re: Intent to Ship: Close requests for CloseWatcher, , and popover=""

t; >> LGTM3 >> >> I agree that introspection can be additive on top of what we want to ship >> here. >> >> On Wed, Oct 18, 2023 at 5:48 PM Philip Jägenstedt >> wrote: >> >>> The spec change has now landed, LGTM2. >>> >>> Mor

Re: [blink-dev] Re: Intent to Ship: Import attributes 'with' syntax

LGTM2 On Wed, Jan 10, 2024 at 5:16 PM Yoav Weiss wrote: > LGTM1 > > On Wed, Jan 10, 2024 at 5:08 PM Nicolò Ribaudo > wrote: > >> > Like other JS language changes, I'm guessing we expect developers to >> use UA sniffing to know where it's safe to ship this syntax? >> >> Yes -- given that this

Re: [blink-dev] Re: Intent to Ship: Use specific fetch destination for JSON/CSS modules

LGTM2, thanks for fixing this! On Wed, Jan 10, 2024 at 5:03 PM Yoav Weiss wrote: > LGTM1 > > > > On Wed, Jan 10, 2024 at 4:58 PM Nicolò Ribaudo > wrote: > >> Yes I made a mistake in the description. The destination for CSS modules >> is indeed "style", and not "css". Thanks for catching it! >>

Re: [blink-dev] Intent to Ship: field-sizing CSS property

Hi Kent, I see that https://github.com/whatwg/html/pull/9903 is still open, do you expect to be able to land it soon? Given the positive review on https://github.com/WebKit/standards-positions/issues/231, perhaps requesting review from someone on the WebKit team would be fruitful? Best regards,

Re: [blink-dev] Intent to Ship: Storage Buckets API

On Fri, Dec 15, 2023 at 9:03 PM Evan Stade wrote: > Thanks all! > > On Wed, Dec 13, 2023 at 5:10 AM Philip Jägenstedt > wrote: > >> Hi Evan, >> >> Thanks for looking into this, and for answering some of my questions >> off-list. To summarize, eviction is

Re: [blink-dev] Intent to deprecate and remove import assertion 'assert' syntax

On Wed, Dec 13, 2023 at 6:10 PM Shu-yu Guo wrote: > On Wed, Dec 13, 2023 at 9:03 AM Philip Jägenstedt > wrote: > >> LGTM2 for Mike's plan of deprecating for 3 milestones, doing outreach, >> and then revisiting this thread. >> >> If we still know of serious bre

Re: [blink-dev] Intent to Ship: Navigational prefetch: follow redirects

LGTM3 On Wed, Dec 13, 2023 at 3:11 AM Mike Taylor wrote: > LGTM2 > On 12/12/23 5:34 PM, Rick Byers wrote: > > Personally I'd consider this prefetch behavior change to be more of a UA > impl detail than a "web exposed API". I'm really glad you're covering this > in a spec and WPT in the hopes of

Re: [blink-dev] Intent to Ship: CSSKeyframesRule.length

LGTM1 with or without a feature flag. I'm comfortable to LGTM this even without a flag because the length property was exposed in Gecko and WebKit

Re: [blink-dev] Intent to Ship: Storage Buckets API

can enable a wide range of tests. In those cases the > calculus of cost vs reward is much more favorable. So I would assume that > changes to testdriver should meet a high bar of broad utility, similar to > how we treat core libraries in //base/. > > Hope that addresses your

Re: [blink-dev] Intent to Ship: Extension of WebDriver command for clicking on FedCM dialogs

LGTM3 On Tue, Dec 5, 2023 at 7:58 PM Rick Byers wrote: > LGTM2 > > On Tue, Dec 5, 2023 at 12:31 PM Mike Taylor > wrote: > >> LGTM1 >> On 12/5/23 3:44 AM, 'Zachary Tan' via blink-dev wrote: >> >> My mistake - it is indeed without the "k", thanks for double checking. >> >> On Tue, Dec 5, 2023 at

Re: [blink-dev] Intent to Ship: Storage Buckets API

d-iframe.https.html: > wpt_internal/storage/buckets/idlharness-worker.https.any.js: > wpt_internal/storage/buckets/opaque-origin.https.window.js: > wpt_internal/storage/buckets/resources/opaque-origin-sandbox.html: > wpt_internal/storage/buckets/storage_bucket_object.tentative.https.any.js:

Re: [blink-dev] Intent to Ship: Storage Buckets API

gt; > thanks for pointing out those two oversights. I have fixed the checkboxes > on the chromestatus entry. It is in fact tested by WPT and supported on all > Blink platforms. > > On Wed, Nov 29, 2023 at 8:43 AM Philip Jägenstedt > wrote: > >> Hi Evan, >> >> A fe

Re: [blink-dev] Intent to Ship: Document rules, response header, eagerness

LGTM3 On Wed, Nov 29, 2023 at 5:55 PM Daniel Bratell wrote: > LGTM2 > > /Daniel > On 2023-11-23 10:11, Yoav Weiss wrote: > > LGTM1 > > These all seem like useful improvements! :) > > > On Wed, Nov 22, 2023 at 8:14 PM Jeremy Roman wrote: > >> >> >> On Wed, Nov 22, 2023 at 11:10 AM Yoav Weiss

Re: [blink-dev] Intent to Ship: Storage Buckets API

Hi Evan, A few questions inline. On Tue, Nov 14, 2023 at 9:38 PM Evan Stade wrote: > > Will this feature be supported on all six Blink platforms (Windows, Mac, > Linux, Chrome OS, Android, and Android WebView)? > > No > Which platform will this not be supported on? > Is this feature fully

Re: [blink-dev] Re: Intent to Ship: Document picture-in-picture: require user gesture for resize APIs

LGTM2 On Wed, Nov 29, 2023 at 4:12 PM Yoav Weiss wrote: > LGTM1 > > On Wednesday, November 29, 2023 at 4:04:49 PM UTC+1 Tommy Steimel wrote: > >> Okay the security reviewer has now re-reviewed it given the updated >> information. Thanks! >> >> On Mon, Nov 27, 2023 at 11:55 PM Rick Byers wrote:

Re: [blink-dev] Intent to Prototype: @page margin boxes

It's great to see a bug with so many stars (now 100!) being addressed. Thanks for filing the TAG review at https://github.com/w3ctag/design-reviews/issues/918 too! On Fri, Nov 3, 2023 at 2:19 PM Morten Stenshorne wrote: > Contact emailsmsten...@chromium.org > >

Re: [blink-dev] Intent to Ship: SpeechSynthesis and SpeechSynthesisVoice interface objects

fix > > On Wed, Jun 30, 2021 at 4:41 AM Daniel Bratell > wrote: > >> LGTM2 >> On 2021-06-30 01:40, TAMURA, Kent wrote: >> >> LGTM1. >> They should have interface objects, and the Gecko status is a good signal. >> >> On Wed, Jun 30, 2021 at 1:52

Re: [blink-dev] Re: PSA: Web contents will honor the Android OS bold text setting

Hi Mark, There is certainly precedent for supporting OS-level settings like this, and doing it is important for the users who use the settings and expect consistent experience. As Dominik notes, most such modes are detectable, and for some the page can react to the preference using prefers-*

Re: [EXTERNAL] Re: [blink-dev] Intent to Implement and Ship: Feature detection for supported clipboard formats

LGTM2 This looks like a small addition that we should ship. It's tested and passing here: https://wpt.fyi/results/clipboard-apis/clipboard-item.https.html?label=experimental=master On Wed, Nov 1, 2023 at 4:43 PM Rick Byers wrote: > LGTM1 > > On Wed, Oct 25, 2023 at 4:33 PM 'Anupam Snigdha' via

Re: [blink-dev] Intent to Ship: CSS masking

LGTM1 Thanks for writing that up, Philip! I believe that should be helpful for release notes and MDN docs down the line. On Thu, Oct 26, 2023 at 7:20 PM 'Philip Rogers' via blink-dev < blink-dev@chromium.org> wrote: > > > On Wednesday, October 25, 2023 at 7:24:34 AM UTC-7 Mike Taylor wrote: > >

Re: [blink-dev] Re: Intent to Ship: WebGPU maxBindGroupsPlusVertexBuffers limit

p;l=1808;drc=b6a33c6fb6097fb097b7e60ad63cb552724cf60e > In the meantime, we have web platform tests to check its existence: > https://chromium-review.googlesource.com/c/chromium/src/+/4952541/3/third_party/blink/web_tests/virtual/stable/webexposed/global-interface-listing-expected.txt > > > On Fri, Oct 27, 2023 at

Re: [blink-dev] Re: Intent to Ship: WebGPU maxBindGroupsPlusVertexBuffers limit

Hi François, Corentin, I greped for "maxBindGroupsPlusVertexBuffers" in a checkout of https://github.com/gpuweb/cts but couldn't find any tests. Should there be shared tests there? Best regards, Philip On Wed, Oct 25, 2023 at 4:25 PM Mike Taylor wrote: > LGTM2 > On 10/25/23 4:32 AM, 'François

Re: [blink-dev] Intent to Ship: CSS and Syntax for registered Custom Properties

LGTM3 On Tue, Oct 24, 2023 at 5:28 PM Chris Harrelson wrote: > LGTM2 > > On Tue, Oct 24, 2023 at 8:27 AM Mike Taylor > wrote: > >> Understood - thanks! >> >> LGTM1 >> On 10/24/23 9:16 AM, Rune Lillesveen wrote: >> >> On Tue, Oct 24, 2023 at 1:58 AM Mike Taylor >> wrote: >> >>> Hey Rune, >>>

Re: [blink-dev] Intent to ship: The Login Status API and its use in FedCM

Hi Christian, Do you have a reviewer for https://github.com/web-platform-tests/wpt/pull/40709 so you can get it merged? Just like spec changes, tests are ideally merged and showing results on wpt.fyi before we ship, so that any issues are apparent and can be addressed. Best regards, Philip On

Re: [blink-dev] Re: Intent to Ship: Deprecate and remove Theora support.

LGTM3 with sentimental feelings. Back in 2010 (https://dev.opera.com/blog/re-introducing-video/) I was cheering for Theora and shipped support in Presto. We now have other open and RF video codecs which have been deployed on a much larger scale, and I'd like to think that Theora and the Xiph

Re: [blink-dev] Intent to Ship: Fire toggle events using microtasks

is a risk for web compatibility, although I was convinced that this > should just improve the consistency of the event timing. > If there is significant breakage, I will disable this change via finch and > revert the spec changes. > > On Fri, Oct 6, 2023 at 4:12 AM Philip Jägensted

Re: [blink-dev] Re: Intent to Ship: Close requests for CloseWatcher, , and popover=""

n/README.md#abuse-analysis >> for more details. >> >> >> Also helpful; thank you! >> >> >> Note that the API generally guides you away from this possibility by >> making the simpler code be the one that automatically calls destroy() for >> you: https://g

Re: [blink-dev] Intent to Prototype and Ship: URL.canParse

LGTM3 https://wpt.fyi/results/url?label=master=experimental=canparse shows this is indeed passing on Firefox and Safari. On Mon, Oct 16, 2023 at 7:34 PM Alex Russell wrote: > LGTM2 > > On Mon, Oct 16, 2023 at 7:24 AM Mike Taylor > wrote: > >> LGTM1 >> On 10/13/23 6:08 PM, Jeremy Roman wrote:

Re: [blink-dev] Intent to Ship: CSS Exponential Functions

LGTM1, when Gecko and WebKit have already shipped there isn't much to discuss :) On Tue, Oct 17, 2023 at 10:00 AM Daniil Sakhapov wrote: > Contact emailssakha...@chromium.org, seo...@chromium.org > > Specification > https://www.w3.org/TR/css-values-4/#exponent-funcs > > Summary > > Add css

Re: [blink-dev] Intent to Ship: MediaStreamTrack Stats

LGTM1, this is a minor addition to an existing API, was discussed in the WG at TPAC, and has a positive standards position from Mozilla. On Mon, Oct 9, 2023 at 4:16 PM Henrik Boström wrote: > *Contant emails:* > h...@chromium.org, h...@chromium.org > > *Explainer:* > This is a small addition to

Re: [blink-dev] Intent to Ship: Fire toggle events using microtasks

It sounds like the idea is to prove this web compatible by shipping it, before updating the spec. On the level of interest, there was no reaction on https://github.com/whatwg/html/issues/9046 after you asked. Is there other communication that makes you relatively sure the interest is there? On

Re: [blink-dev] Intent to Ship: Japanese Phrase Line Breaking

LGTM1 If there is feedback on the TAG review or Mozilla issue while this feature is on its way to stable, can you loop back to this thread? On Thu, Sep 7, 2023 at 4:01 PM Philip Jägenstedt wrote: > Thanks for investigating and fixing the failures, Koji! > > On the UA defined rules,

Re: [blink-dev] Intent to Ship: Japanese Phrase Line Breaking

Thanks for investigating and fixing the failures, Koji! On the UA defined rules, if other vendors are happy with the examples used, then that's what matters in practice. If you do get pushback on specific examples I hope there are others that can be used that are a common ground. I think

Re: [blink-dev] Intent to Ship: Japanese Phrase Line Breaking

Hi Koji, It looks like the tests for this are here: https://wpt.fyi/results/css/css-text/word-break/auto-phrase?label=experimental=master Since the implementation uses a heuristic and the spec doesn't define the precise rules, can you say something about the approach taken in the tests? Did you

Re: [blink-dev] Intent to Ship: :user-valid and :user-invalid CSS pseudo-classes

Thanks for adding that test Joey! https://staging.wpt.fyi/results/css/selectors/valid-invalid-form-fieldset.html?label=pr_head=1=41801 shows that it also passes on Firefox. Not sure why Safari didn't run, but that's not your fault and not something to block on. LGTM1, and thanks for working on

Re: [blink-dev] Intent to Ship: Document picture-in-picture

Thanks Domenic for mentoring and vouching :) I took a very cursory look at the API shape and sent a small fix , thanks for reviewing that. The concerns on https://github.com/WebKit/standards-positions/issues/41 are device independence

Re: [blink-dev] Intent to Prototype & Ship: Report Critical-CH caused restart in NavigationTiming

LGTM2 On Wed, Jun 7, 2023 at 5:36 PM Chris Harrelson wrote: > Thanks! LGTM1 > > On Wed, Jun 7, 2023 at 6:55 AM Ari Chivukula wrote: > >> I'm back! The code has been merged behind a flag w/ wpts: >> https://chromium-review.googlesource.com/c/chromium/src/+/4538244 >> >> The spec changes have

Re: [blink-dev] Intent to Ship: CSS overlay property

LGTM3 Joey, can make sure to respond on https://github.com/w3ctag/design-reviews/issues/829 as well? I don't think the feedback necessitates changes, but it would be great to make it clear on the issue. On Wed, May 24, 2023 at 5:59 PM Mike West wrote: > I agree that

Re: [blink-dev] Intent to Ship: Add value argument to URLSearchParams's has() and delete()

> wrote: > >> Understood! >> >> I am going with the local testing approach for now, I think what I will >> do is raise exceptions if a difference in behavior is noted as Philip >> suggested, and see how many of these example sites raise them. This may >> take a l

Re: [blink-dev] Intent to Ship: Add value argument to URLSearchParams's has() and delete()

login > flow clicking on navigation, etc. Although I think would need to go a > little deep on that, Should I submit a new CL for this counter thing? or do > deeper local testing? > > On Monday, May 22, 2023 at 10:09:26 PM UTC+5:30 Philip Jägenstedt wrote: > >> Well, this is

Re: [blink-dev] Intent to Ship: Add value argument to URLSearchParams's has() and delete()

Well, this is a tricky case with no obvious answer. You've found one case of array.some(...), which most likely will change the behavior of the code. For the other cases where a second argument is passed is explicitly, it depends on the value whether it changes behavior, if it's the same value

Re: [blink-dev] Intent to Ship: Add value argument to URLSearchParams's has() and delete()

gt;> Yours Sincerely, >>> Debadree >>> On Monday, May 15, 2023 at 10:06:05 PM UTC+5:30 PhistucK wrote: >>> >>>> It would be something like this - >>>> >>>> https://groups.google.com/a/chromium.org/g/blink-dev/c/rDaQdKpWAx8/m/qjTlRNShAgAJ

Re: [blink-dev] Intent to Ship: Add value argument to URLSearchParams's has() and delete()

Monday, May 15, 2023 at 10:06:05 PM UTC+5:30 PhistucK wrote: > >> It would be something like this - >> >> https://groups.google.com/a/chromium.org/g/blink-dev/c/rDaQdKpWAx8/m/qjTlRNShAgAJ >> >> ☆*PhistucK* >> >> >> On Mon, May 15, 2023 at 10:2

Re: [blink-dev] Intent to Ship: CSS Motion Path

On Sat, May 13, 2023 at 1:09 AM Mike Taylor wrote: > Hi Daniil, > On 5/11/23 8:38 AM, Daniil Sakhapov wrote: > > Contact emails sakha...@chromium.org > > Explainer As part of the Interop 2023 we ship the rest of the CSS Motion > Path. Currently only path() works. And after a spec has been

Re: [blink-dev] Intent to Ship: Add value argument to URLSearchParams's has() and delete()

esting. The rest of sites do occasionally > (sometimes with the second argument being 0, sometimes a different > number, sometimes a string), but none seemed to break in my testing. > > Andreu > On 5/12/23 10:38, Philip Jägenstedt wrote: > > It looks like this was spec'd in ht

Re: [blink-dev] Intent to Ship: Add value argument to URLSearchParams's has() and delete()

On Fri, May 12, 2023 at 11:57 AM Debadree Chatterjee wrote: > Hey! > > > to ensure Mozilla is aware this happening? > > I am filing an issue for this > Thanks! Can you link it here when filed? > > What can you say about usage in the wild here? > > In regards to this I believe no more data was

Re: [blink-dev] Intent to Ship: Add value argument to URLSearchParams's has() and delete()

It looks like this was spec'd in https://github.com/whatwg/url/pull/735, with participation from Chromium and WebKit folks. https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1831587 was filed for Gecko, but there's no clear position. Would you mind filing an issue at

Re: [blink-dev] Intent to Ship: Keyboard-focusable scroll containers

LGTM2 On Wed, May 10, 2023 at 5:50 PM Mike Taylor wrote: > LGTM1 > On 5/9/23 6:15 PM, Di Zhang wrote: > > Yes, this change is flagged behind the feature KeyboardFocusableScrollers > (disabled by passing > `--disable-blink-features=KeyboardFocusableScrollers`). > > We have looped in aleventhal@

Re: [blink-dev] Intent to Ship: Boolean Context Style Container Queries

LGTM2 On Wed, May 3, 2023 at 11:35 PM Manuel Rego Casasnovas wrote: > LGTM1 > > On 03/05/2023 14:22, Rune Lillesveen wrote: > > > > Contact emails > > > > futh...@chromium.org > > > > > > Explainer > > > > None > > > > > > Specification > >

Re: [blink-dev] PSA: Adding WebDriver commands for interacting with FedCM dialogs

Hi Christian, Thanks for sending this PSA, and thank you for careful attention to testability of FedCM. It's extra work, but if history is any guide it will make FedCM more interoperable, and web developers will rejoice! WebDriver changes don't need to go through the Blink launch process, but a

Re: [blink-dev] Intent-to-Ship: MediaRecorder keyframe configurability

that a separate spec issue be filed on that topic, > https://github.com/w3c/mediacapture-record/issues/219. > > > On Thu, Apr 27, 2023 at 12:38 PM Philip Jägenstedt > wrote: > >> On Thu, Apr 27, 2023 at 9:24 AM Markus Handell >> wrote: >> >>> >>&g

Re: [blink-dev] Intent-to-Ship: MediaRecorder keyframe configurability

On Thu, Apr 27, 2023 at 9:24 AM Markus Handell wrote: > >> Thanks for filing >> https://github.com/web-platform-tests/wpt/issues/39642, I've asked >> there for more details on what it would take to test this. >> >> > I added some more detail there. > > >> The spec change added two dictionary

Re: [blink-dev] Intent to Implement and Ship: Update of "xml" prefix handling in lookupNamespaceURI() and createNSResolver()

LGTM3, thanks for measuring with use counter and aligning with Gecko and WebKit on this. On Wed, Apr 26, 2023 at 9:11 PM Mike Taylor wrote: > LGTM2 > On 4/26/23 11:28 AM, Mike West wrote: > > LGTM1. > > Testing looks good, and skipping the TAG review for features specified and > shipped in

Re: [blink-dev] Intent-to-Ship: MediaRecorder keyframe configurability

On Wed, Apr 26, 2023 at 12:42 PM Yoav Weiss wrote: > > > On Fri, Apr 21, 2023 at 6:48 PM 'Markus Handell' via blink-dev < > blink-dev@chromium.org> wrote: > >> Contact emails: >> >> hande...@google.com >> >> Explainer: >> >>- >> >>https://github.com/w3c/mediacapture-record/pull/216 >>

Re: [blink-dev] Re: Intent-to-Ship: MediaRecorder keyframe configurability

Thanks for filing https://github.com/web-platform-tests/wpt/issues/39642, I've asked there for more details on what it would take to test this. The spec change added two dictionary members to https://w3c.github.io/mediacapture-record/#mediarecorderoptions-section which means that it would at

Re: [blink-dev] Intent to Implement and Ship: Use RegExp v flag instead of u for HTML pattern attribute

1412729#c46 | ✅ | >> | https://www.thebay.com | >> https://crbug.com/1412729#c45 | ✅ | >> >> This is not quite a "random" sample, as I instead started with the most >> common s

Re: [blink-dev] Intent to Implement and Ship: Use RegExp v flag instead of u for HTML pattern attribute

On Wed, Apr 19, 2023 at 10:28 PM Rick Byers wrote: > On Wed, Apr 19, 2023 at 3:41 PM Philip Jägenstedt > wrote: > >> I wonder if we can get enough confidence with less work than >> investigating 40 randomly chosen sites from UseCounter hits. >> >> This i

Re: [blink-dev] Intent to Implement and Ship: Use RegExp v flag instead of u for HTML pattern attribute

I’ll update the >>>> ChromeStatus entry to refer to it. >>>> >>>> On Tuesday, April 4, 2023 at 5:21:16 AM UTC-7 mt...@google.com wrote: >>>>> >>>> Thanks to the UseCounter + UKM + M112 hitting Stable, more results are >>>>>>

Re: [blink-dev] Intent to Ship: Deprecate module size limit for WebAssembly.Module()

Hey Andreas, Do you know what the limits of other browsers are? If testing a 1 GB module is too slow to be reliable (sometimes timing out) then perhaps there's a large-ish module you can test with that still exceeds the current limits? Note that you could also add a manual test in WPT for the

Re: [blink-dev] Intent to Ship: CSS :lang pseudo class level 4

ed-filtering.html >> and >> https://github.com/WebKit/WebKit/blob/main/LayoutTests/fast/selectors/lang-extended-filtering-with-string-arguments.html >> >> About the standards-positions issue, I filed it on >> https://github.com/mozilla/standards-positions/issues/735 >

Re: [blink-dev] Intent to Implement and Ship: Use RegExp v flag instead of u for HTML pattern attribute

I took a look at https://github.com/whatwg/html/pull/7908 and it looks like there's agreement to merge it, but it's waiting on this intent to be approved. Normally we block in the other direction, but that's fine, as long as the spec change is merged. Looks like there's broad support for this

Re: [blink-dev] Intent to Ship: CSS :lang pseudo class level 4

Hi Roger, I took a look for the tests, and am wondering if the tests added here are for Level 4? https://github.com/web-platform-tests/wpt/pull/37950 At least some of them are already passing in Chrome Dev (with experimental features enabled), but not Chrome stable, so some of these tests seem

Re: [blink-dev] Re: Intent to Ship: The Popover API

LGTM3 On Wed, Mar 22, 2023 at 4:52 PM Mike Taylor wrote: > LGTM2 > On 3/21/23 3:01 AM, Noam Rosenthal wrote: > > > > On Mon, Mar 20, 2023 at 8:13 PM Mason Freed wrote: > >> On Mon, Mar 20, 2023 at 1:19 AM Noam Rosenthal >> wrote: >> >>> Voicing some concern about this API that I've raised

Re: [blink-dev] Re: Intent to Ship: The Popover API

Hi Noam, Do you know if these sanitizers generally work as allowlists or blocklists? In other words, will the new popover attribute be allowed through current versions of those sanitizers? Best regards, Philip On Mon, Mar 20, 2023 at 9:19 AM Noam Rosenthal wrote: > Voicing some concern about

Re: [blink-dev] Intent to Prototype: CSS font-palette property animation

Hi Munira, Do you think this will require any changes to DevTools for debuggability? There's a checklist at https://goo.gle/devtools-checklist, where the key question is "how would a web developer making use of your new WPF test and debug their code?" Best regards, Philip On Mon, Mar 20, 2023

Re: [blink-dev] Intent to Ship: The Popover API

Hi Mason, This will be great, looking forward to seeing it ship! Two questions inline and bonus API-owner-hat-off question: Do you have a use counter for this feature which you'll use to track adoption? Do you have a ballpark guess about what the usage will be like a year from now? (There's an

  1   2   3   >