On 02/02/2022 16:51, Rouslan Solomakhin wrote:
>> Rouslan, it looks to me like the API is designed to support multiple
> stores, right?
>> For example if Samsung decided that they wanted to support connecting
> it up to
>> both the Android Play Billing API (so SBrowser could provide
> equivalent user
>> experience to Chrome) AND to the Samsung store (so merchants could have
>> a choice in stores, perhaps competing on terms like commission rate) they
>> could do that with the current API shape, right?
>
> That is correct. The API shape has been generalized enough to be
> store-agnostic and browser-agnostic. We have
> <https://docs.google.com/document/d/1X2j1wKC2T4RONcUGYxGus8Dytv6s2_tVTUSkWDWPza4/edit#heading=h.chc35okxwb9>
> been <https://www.w3.org/2021/10/28-wpwg-minutes.html#t04> pitching the
> API to other stores and browsers as well.
It'd be really nice to get some engagement from other browsers or
stores. There are lots of stores, and also several browsers based on
Chromium. Have we talked to them? Is anyone interested in adding support
for this?
There are also mentions to v2.0 and v2.1. Which one would be shipping?
Are you expecting more changes on the API in the short term? It might be
hard to implement those changes once it's shipped.
On the TPAC presentation there was this plan:
* Collect feedback from the origin trial.
* Publish draft spec in WICG.
* Iterate with more developer feedback.
* Collaborate with other user agents and app stores.
* Ship it.
It looks like the spec PR hasn't been merged yet
(https://github.com/WICG/digital-goods/pull/40), and I'd love to
understand better the efforts to convince other browsers and stores
about the benefits of this API.
> On Wed, Feb 2, 2022 at 10:31 AM Rick Byers <rby...@chromium.org
> <mailto:rby...@chromium.org>> wrote:
>
> +1 to Yoav's perspective here. Our job is not to force
> interoperability but to create the conditions to make future
> interoperability as easy as possible. We have multiple examples of
> APIs where originally Chrome was the only interested browser, but
> once sites started to adopt them and demonstrate the value, other
> browsers decided they wanted to provide their users with that value
> too. I would hate to create a condition where, for example, Brave,
> Edge or Samsung browser felt compelled to support an API with
> 'Chrome' in it's name once there was clear user value to supporting
> the use case. Further, if we put Chrome in the name that could be
> perceived as indicating that we were actively trying to create such
> browser lock-in or otherwise create conditions for Chrome to have an
> unfair advantage over other browsers when nothing could be further
> from the truth.
>
> Rouslan, it looks to me like the API is designed to support multiple
> stores, right? For example if Samsung decided that they wanted to
> support connecting it up to both the Android Play Billing API (so
> SBrowser could provide equivalent user experience to Chrome) AND to
> the Samsung store (so merchants could have a choice in stores,
> perhaps competing on terms like commission rate) they could do that
> with the current API shape, right?
>
> We've fought hard to get away from the webkit-prefixed and "chrome
> apps" world and we know it's not possible to know up front that an
> API will never have interoperable implementations. I think the
> downside of potentially using up a small piece of the global API
> namespace for an API that fails to achieve interoperability is much
> smaller than the downside of disincentivizing other implementations
> or burning a Chrome/Play API name into the web for what may become
> more general.
I agree this is something we want to avoid. And I understand what Yoav
and your are explaining. It makes sense to create standard APIs not
attached to a single browser, so in the future they can be adopted by
others.
I just want to have a better picture of what we're doing to convince
others to adopt this.
> At the same time, the TAG has been clear that their time is best
> spent on the APIs that are most likely to become interoperable
> standards. Dan told me at one point that it might be best if we
> didn't even both asking for TAG review that didn't have engagement
> from a 2nd browser., so I don't think we should expect them to have
> any real interest in reviewing this API. They've already marked this
> review as closed, so I don't think we should expect a response.
TAG was closed with that feedback in July:
https://github.com/w3ctag/design-reviews/issues/571
A week ago there was a comment that this was going to ship without
following that feedback, and the TAG reopened the issue. That's what I
was suggesting to give them some time to reply.
> Rego, what do you think? I'll give my LGTM3 but also happy to keep
> discussing the tradeoffs here. I really appreciate having the
> non-google API owners perspective here, it's always possible that us
> Googlers have some unconscious bias influencing our thinking.
I believe I agree with your POV here. After looking deeper into this, my
concerns now are mostly related to find other browsers or stores
interested. Once we get more people involved, there'll be probably
changes on the API and so on.
Cheers,
Rego
> On Wed, Feb 2, 2022 at 6:52 AM Yoav Weiss <yoavwe...@chromium.org
> <mailto:yoavwe...@chromium.org>> wrote:
>
>
>
> On Wednesday, February 2, 2022 at 9:25:54 AM UTC+1 Manuel Rego
> wrote:
>
> TAG suggested back in July that this API something specific
> to Chrome or
> Google Play Store. It looks like this hasn't been done, any
> good reason
> to not doing that?
>
>
> From my perspective, I believe that piece of feedback runs
> contrary to Blink's interoperability principles
>
> <https://docs.google.com/document/d/1romO1kHzpcwTwPsCzrkNWlh0bBXBwHfUsCt98-CNzkY/edit#heading=h.t71a2ioil8j0>,
> and is contrary to what we (well, I) told the API's developers
> when they came to this list with a proprietary proposal
>
> <https://groups.google.com/a/chromium.org/g/blink-dev/c/vkS3k30lWNs/m/Gt4sKECQEgAJ>.
> The proposal got a lot of interest
>
> <https://discourse.wicg.io/t/proposal-web-payments-digital-product-management-api/4350>
> on
> WICG, and even if the only store that implements it is the
> Google Play Store, I think there's value in having an
> interoperable API that would enable other Chromiums to ship, as
> well as enable implementations in non-Chromium Android browsers.
> I'd also be hesitant to exclude the possibility of other stores
>
> <https://github.com/w3ctag/design-reviews/issues/571#issuecomment-861188412>
> implementing this API as well in the future.
>
>
>
>
> Also there's been an update on the TAG about the plan of
> shipping this
> API without changing the name. But that was just 1 week ago,
> should we
> give them some time to reply before shipping?
>
> Cheers,
> Rego
>
> On 01/02/2022 20:41, Yoav Weiss wrote:
> > LGTM2
> >
> > On Tue, Feb 1, 2022 at 8:00 PM Chris Harrelson
> <chris...@chromium.org <mailto:chris...@chromium.org>
> > <mailto:chris...@chromium.org
> <mailto:chris...@chromium.org>>> wrote:
> >
> >
> > LGTM1
> >
> > On Tue, Feb 1, 2022 at 6:16 AM Rouslan Solomakhin
> > <rous...@chromium.org <mailto:rous...@chromium.org>
> <mailto:rous...@chromium.org <mailto:rous...@chromium.org>>>
> wrote:
> >
> > Contact emails
> >
> > mgi...@chromium.org <mailto:mgi...@chromium.org>
> <mailto:mgi...@chromium.org <mailto:mgi...@chromium.org>>,
> > rous...@chromium.org <mailto:rous...@chromium.org>
> <mailto:rous...@chromium.org <mailto:rous...@chromium.org>>,
> > glen...@chromium.org <mailto:glen...@chromium.org>
> <mailto:glen...@chromium.org <mailto:glen...@chromium.org>>
> >
> >
> > Explainer
> >
> >
> https://github.com/WICG/digital-goods/blob/main/explainer.md
> <https://github.com/WICG/digital-goods/blob/main/explainer.md>
> >
> <https://github.com/WICG/digital-goods/blob/main/explainer.md
> <https://github.com/WICG/digital-goods/blob/main/explainer.md>>
>
> >
> >
> > Spec
> >
> > https://wicg.github.io/digital-goods/
> <https://wicg.github.io/digital-goods/>
> > <https://wicg.github.io/digital-goods/
> <https://wicg.github.io/digital-goods/>>- Currently being
> > reviewed by a spec mentor, so some details may change
> > (hopefully, only formatting).
> >
> >
> > Summary
> >
> > An API for querying and managing digital products to
> facilitate
> > in-app purchases from web applications, in conjunction
> with the
> > Payment Request API (which is used to make the actual
> > purchases). The API would be linked to a digital distribution
> > service connected to via the user agent. In Chrome, this is
> > specifically a web API wrapper around the Android Play
> Billing API.
> >
> >
> > Origin trial analysis
> >
> > DGAPI v2.0 is currently in an origin trial with M99 being the
> > last milestone. So far, 40 people have responded to the
> origin
> > trial survey. Notable data points:
> >
> >
> > How easy was it to use the feature:4.1 out of 6.
> >
> > (0 - extremely difficult … 6 - extremely easy.)
> >
> >
> > How likely are you to keep using this feature:5.5 out of 6.
> >
> > (0 - extremely unlikely … 6 - extremely likely.)
> >
> >
> > The most common comments were about improving feature
> > documentation and debuggability. That is being tracked in
> > https://github.com/WICG/digital-goods/issues/33
> <https://github.com/WICG/digital-goods/issues/33>
> > <https://github.com/WICG/digital-goods/issues/33
> <https://github.com/WICG/digital-goods/issues/33>>.
> >
> >
> > Blink component
> >
> > Blink>Payments
> >
>
> <https://bugs.chromium.org/p/chromium/issues/list?q=component:Blink%3EPayments
>
> <https://bugs.chromium.org/p/chromium/issues/list?q=component:Blink%3EPayments>>
>
> >
> >
> > Search tags
> >
> > payments <https://chromestatus.com/features#tags:payments
> <https://chromestatus.com/features#tags:payments>>,
> > billing <https://chromestatus.com/features#tags:billing
> <https://chromestatus.com/features#tags:billing>>
> >
> >
> > TAG review
> >
> > https://github.com/w3ctag/design-reviews/issues/571
> <https://github.com/w3ctag/design-reviews/issues/571>
> > <https://github.com/w3ctag/design-reviews/issues/571
> <https://github.com/w3ctag/design-reviews/issues/571>>TAG
> > recommends making a Chrome-specific API. Other issues
> addressed.
> >
> >
> > TAG review status
> >
> > Issues addressed
> >
> >
> > Risks
> >
> > Interoperability and Compatibility
> >
> > Similar to Payment Request: this API is used to talk to
> specific
> > store backends, and so its usage is tailored to the specific
> > store. The reason it's a proposed web standard is so that the
> > same code (which is specific to one store) is portable across
> > browsers.
> >
> >
> > Gecko: No signal
> > (https://github.com/mozilla/standards-positions/issues/349
> <https://github.com/mozilla/standards-positions/issues/349>
> > <https://github.com/mozilla/standards-positions/issues/349
> <https://github.com/mozilla/standards-positions/issues/349>>)
> > Requested 2020-05-27.
> >
> >
> > WebKit: No signal
> >
>
> (https://lists.webkit.org/pipermail/webkit-dev/2021-October/032001.html
>
> <https://lists.webkit.org/pipermail/webkit-dev/2021-October/032001.html>
>
> >
>
> <https://lists.webkit.org/pipermail/webkit-dev/2021-October/032001.html
>
> <https://lists.webkit.org/pipermail/webkit-dev/2021-October/032001.html>>)
>
> > Requested 2021-10-08.
> >
> >
> > Web developers: Positive
> >
>
> (https://discourse.wicg.io/t/proposal-web-payments-digital-product-management-api/4350
>
> <https://discourse.wicg.io/t/proposal-web-payments-digital-product-management-api/4350>
>
> >
>
> <https://discourse.wicg.io/t/proposal-web-payments-digital-product-management-api/4350
>
> <https://discourse.wicg.io/t/proposal-web-payments-digital-product-management-api/4350>>).
>
> >
> >
> > Other signals: rouslan@ presented DGAPI at 2021 TPAC
> > <https://www.w3.org/2021/Talks/rouslan-dgapi-20211028.pdf
>
> <https://www.w3.org/2021/Talks/rouslan-dgapi-20211028.pdf>>(meeting
>
> > notes <https://www.w3.org/2021/10/28-wpwg-minutes.html#t04
> <https://www.w3.org/2021/10/28-wpwg-minutes.html#t04>>) and
> > at a recent PWA Dev Sync
> >
>
> <https://drive.google.com/file/d/1a_6_QVEQrEeUduc8nPE-uc7PKCr-Yhx7/view
>
> <https://drive.google.com/file/d/1a_6_QVEQrEeUduc8nPE-uc7PKCr-Yhx7/view>>(meeting
>
> > notes
> >
>
> <https://docs.google.com/document/d/1X2j1wKC2T4RONcUGYxGus8Dytv6s2_tVTUSkWDWPza4/edit#heading=h.chc35okxwb9
>
> <https://docs.google.com/document/d/1X2j1wKC2T4RONcUGYxGus8Dytv6s2_tVTUSkWDWPza4/edit#heading=h.chc35okxwb9>>).
>
> > Other browser implementers and app stores do not appear to
> have
> > immediate plans to engage with DGAPI. There were some
> questions,
> > no objections.
> >
> >
> > Ergonomics
> >
> > Digital Goods API is used in tandem with the Payment
> Request API.
> >
> >
> > In order for another browser to implement Digital Goods
> API for
> > Play Billing in the same way as Chrome, they would need to
> > implement something like the Trusted Web Activity
> >
> <https://developer.chrome.com/docs/android/trusted-web-activity/
>
> <https://developer.chrome.com/docs/android/trusted-web-activity/>>(TWA)
>
> > feature and then invoke the TWA shell methods for
> communicating
> > with Play Billing. The android-browser-helper
> > <https://github.com/GoogleChrome/android-browser-helper
> <https://github.com/GoogleChrome/android-browser-helper>>is
> a TWA
> > template code that we have been recommending app
> developers to
> > use for the Play Billing integration.
> >
> >
> >
> > Debuggability
> >
> > We have had several requests from developers to make the API
> > easier to debug, but it is difficult due to the
> interaction with
> > a backing service based in an app/store context. We are
> looking
> > for suggestions
> (https://github.com/WICG/digital-goods/issues/33
> <https://github.com/WICG/digital-goods/issues/33>
> > <https://github.com/WICG/digital-goods/issues/33
> <https://github.com/WICG/digital-goods/issues/33>>) on how we
> > might improve the debuggability of the API.
> >
> >
> > Is this feature fully tested by web-platform-tests
> >
>
> <https://chromium.googlesource.com/chromium/src/+/master/docs/testing/web_platform_tests.md
>
> <https://chromium.googlesource.com/chromium/src/+/master/docs/testing/web_platform_tests.md>>?
>
> >
> > The tests are in
> > //third_party/blink/web_tests/wpt_internal/digital-goods.
> >
> >
> > I think these could move to WPT proper with .tentative
> file names?
> >
> >
> >
> > Flag name
> >
> > DigitalGoods
> >
> >
> > Requires code in //chrome?
> >
> > False
> >
> >
> > Tracking bug
> >
> > https://crbug.com/1248319 <https://crbug.com/1248319>
> <https://crbug.com/1248319 <https://crbug.com/1248319>>
> >
> >
> > Launch bug
> >
> > https://crbug.com/1250123 <https://crbug.com/1250123>
> <https://crbug.com/1250123 <https://crbug.com/1250123>> - There
> > are no code changes from the current origin trial to what we
> > intend to ship to stable. Therefore, there is no new tracking
> > bug or launch bug being filed.
> >
> >
> > Estimated milestones
> >
> > Origin trial end: 99
> >
> > Ship to stable begin: 100
> >
> >
> > Link to entry on the Chrome Platform Status
> >
> > https://chromestatus.com/feature/5339955595313152
> <https://chromestatus.com/feature/5339955595313152>
> > <https://chromestatus.com/feature/5339955595313152
> <https://chromestatus.com/feature/5339955595313152>>
> >
> >
> > Links to previous Intent discussions
> >
> > Intent to prototype 1.0:
> >
> >
> https://groups.google.com/a/chromium.org/g/blink-dev/c/vkS3k30lWNs
>
> <https://groups.google.com/a/chromium.org/g/blink-dev/c/vkS3k30lWNs>
>
> >
>
> <https://groups.google.com/a/chromium.org/g/blink-dev/c/vkS3k30lWNs
>
> <https://groups.google.com/a/chromium.org/g/blink-dev/c/vkS3k30lWNs>>.
>
> >
> > Intent to experiment 1.0:
> >
> >
>
> https://groups.google.com/a/chromium.org/g/blink-dev/c/syI9_M9dANY/m/3lt-QGMHAgAJ
>
> <https://groups.google.com/a/chromium.org/g/blink-dev/c/syI9_M9dANY/m/3lt-QGMHAgAJ>
>
> >
>
> <https://groups.google.com/a/chromium.org/g/blink-dev/c/syI9_M9dANY/m/3lt-QGMHAgAJ
>
> <https://groups.google.com/a/chromium.org/g/blink-dev/c/syI9_M9dANY/m/3lt-QGMHAgAJ>>.
>
> >
> > Intent to continue experimenting 1.0:
> >
> >
> https://groups.google.com/a/chromium.org/g/blink-dev/c/uoTx_cRuL5o
>
> <https://groups.google.com/a/chromium.org/g/blink-dev/c/uoTx_cRuL5o>
>
> >
>
> <https://groups.google.com/a/chromium.org/g/blink-dev/c/uoTx_cRuL5o
>
> <https://groups.google.com/a/chromium.org/g/blink-dev/c/uoTx_cRuL5o>>.
>
> >
> > Intent to experiment 2.0:
> >
> >
>
> https://groups.google.com/a/chromium.org/g/blink-dev/c/wIYqo3F_Vmo/m/uKw6hDa8BgAJ
>
> <https://groups.google.com/a/chromium.org/g/blink-dev/c/wIYqo3F_Vmo/m/uKw6hDa8BgAJ>
>
> >
>
> <https://groups.google.com/a/chromium.org/g/blink-dev/c/wIYqo3F_Vmo/m/uKw6hDa8BgAJ
>
> <https://groups.google.com/a/chromium.org/g/blink-dev/c/wIYqo3F_Vmo/m/uKw6hDa8BgAJ>>.
>
> >
> >
> > --
> > 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
> <mailto:blink-dev%2bunsubscr...@chromium.org>
> > <mailto:blink-dev+unsubscr...@chromium.org
> <mailto:blink-dev%2bunsubscr...@chromium.org>>.
> > To view this discussion on the web visit
> >
>
> https://groups.google.com/a/chromium.org/d/msgid/blink-dev/CAMMzaWEND_DnBLvCqrtiRoXzxgUrRzC0i%2Bs55Jxa439yui0xFw%40mail.gmail.com
>
> <https://groups.google.com/a/chromium.org/d/msgid/blink-dev/CAMMzaWEND_DnBLvCqrtiRoXzxgUrRzC0i%2Bs55Jxa439yui0xFw%40mail.gmail.com>
>
> >
>
> <https://groups.google.com/a/chromium.org/d/msgid/blink-dev/CAMMzaWEND_DnBLvCqrtiRoXzxgUrRzC0i%2Bs55Jxa439yui0xFw%40mail.gmail.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer
>
> <https://groups.google.com/a/chromium.org/d/msgid/blink-dev/CAMMzaWEND_DnBLvCqrtiRoXzxgUrRzC0i%2Bs55Jxa439yui0xFw%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
> <mailto:blink-dev%2bunsubscr...@chromium.org>
> > <mailto:blink-dev+unsubscr...@chromium.org
> <mailto:blink-dev%2bunsubscr...@chromium.org>>.
> > To view this discussion on the web visit
> >
>
> https://groups.google.com/a/chromium.org/d/msgid/blink-dev/CAOMQ%2Bw835Xd4N%2BhdqG6e-U0U8O39rHPrmDKncRQNn9bGeET8nQ%40mail.gmail.com
>
> <https://groups.google.com/a/chromium.org/d/msgid/blink-dev/CAOMQ%2Bw835Xd4N%2BhdqG6e-U0U8O39rHPrmDKncRQNn9bGeET8nQ%40mail.gmail.com>
>
> >
>
> <https://groups.google.com/a/chromium.org/d/msgid/blink-dev/CAOMQ%2Bw835Xd4N%2BhdqG6e-U0U8O39rHPrmDKncRQNn9bGeET8nQ%40mail.gmail.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer
>
> <https://groups.google.com/a/chromium.org/d/msgid/blink-dev/CAOMQ%2Bw835Xd4N%2BhdqG6e-U0U8O39rHPrmDKncRQNn9bGeET8nQ%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
> <mailto:blink-dev%2bunsubscr...@chromium.org>
> > <mailto:blink-dev+unsubscr...@chromium.org
> <mailto:blink-dev%2bunsubscr...@chromium.org>>.
> > To view this discussion on the web visit
> >
>
> https://groups.google.com/a/chromium.org/d/msgid/blink-dev/CAL5BFfVwSgxMeq%3DvPmstfiOEcciNSCw9wDkyTiadrvc7z9qnVw%40mail.gmail.com
>
> <https://groups.google.com/a/chromium.org/d/msgid/blink-dev/CAL5BFfVwSgxMeq%3DvPmstfiOEcciNSCw9wDkyTiadrvc7z9qnVw%40mail.gmail.com>
>
> >
>
> <https://groups.google.com/a/chromium.org/d/msgid/blink-dev/CAL5BFfVwSgxMeq%3DvPmstfiOEcciNSCw9wDkyTiadrvc7z9qnVw%40mail.gmail.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer
>
> <https://groups.google.com/a/chromium.org/d/msgid/blink-dev/CAL5BFfVwSgxMeq%3DvPmstfiOEcciNSCw9wDkyTiadrvc7z9qnVw%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
> <mailto:blink-dev+unsubscr...@chromium.org>.
> To view this discussion on the web visit
>
> https://groups.google.com/a/chromium.org/d/msgid/blink-dev/58d2ff10-efe9-470c-9ed6-9ec555a44194n%40chromium.org
>
> <https://groups.google.com/a/chromium.org/d/msgid/blink-dev/58d2ff10-efe9-470c-9ed6-9ec555a44194n%40chromium.org?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
> <mailto:blink-dev+unsubscr...@chromium.org>.
> To view this discussion on the web visit
> https://groups.google.com/a/chromium.org/d/msgid/blink-dev/CAMMzaWGvt-NRov%3D3M8sCw9SzzKPcq3fC8CLRuQtv2xnhxmPZOg%40mail.gmail.com
> <https://groups.google.com/a/chromium.org/d/msgid/blink-dev/CAMMzaWGvt-NRov%3D3M8sCw9SzzKPcq3fC8CLRuQtv2xnhxmPZOg%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/ad74426a-8544-04a0-4c58-0f06124d0508%40igalia.com.
