LGTM2
On Thu, May 12, 2022 at 6:26 PM Daniel Bratell <bratel...@gmail.com> wrote: > LGTM1 > > /Daniel > > > On 2022-05-11 09:44, Yoav Weiss wrote: > > > > On Tue, May 10, 2022 at 8:40 PM Jeremy Roman <jbro...@chromium.org> wrote: > >> On Tue, May 10, 2022 at 8:41 AM Yoav Weiss <yoavwe...@chromium.org> >> wrote: >> >>> >>> >>> On Thu, Apr 14, 2022 at 12:36 AM Jeremy Roman <jbro...@chromium.org> >>> wrote: >>> >>>> Contact emails >>>> >>>> jbro...@chromium.org, kenjibah...@chromium.org >>>> >>>> Explainer >>>> >>>> https://github.com/WICG/nav-speculation/blob/main/triggers.md >>>> >>>> Specification >>>> >>>> https://wicg.github.io/nav-speculation/speculation-rules.html >>>> >>>> https://wicg.github.io/nav-speculation/prefetch.html >>>> >>>> Summary >>>> >>>> Flexible syntax for defining what outgoing links are eligible to be >>>> prepared speculatively before navigation. Enables access to additional >>>> enhancements, such as use of a private prefetch proxy, where applicable. >>>> >>> >>> So IIUC, this intent is for shipping cross-origin prefetch? Where have >>> y'all landed on the question of cache partitioning? Which partition is >>> storing this prefetched resource? >>> >> >> It is isolated from any existing cache partition, and if the user does >> not then navigate to the prefetched resource it is not stored further. >> > > OK, thanks! > > >> >> This is limited to the "prefetch" action, and does not include >>>> "prerender". The Chrome setting (extended preloading) which allows any site >>>> to request use of the private prefetch proxy and was previously mentioned >>>> on intents for this feature, is currently disabled for policy reasons but >>>> can be exposed via Finch as part of a launch, if approved. >>>> >>>> Blink component >>>> >>>> Internals>Preload >>>> <https://bugs.chromium.org/p/chromium/issues/list?q=component:Internals%3EPreload> >>>> >>>> TAG review >>>> >>>> https://github.com/w3ctag/design-reviews/issues/611 >>>> https://github.com/w3ctag/design-reviews/issues/721 >>>> >>> >>> https://github.com/WICG/nav-speculation/issues/160 which seems like >>> something we'd want to resolve before shipping. >>> Are y'all considering this new syntax? >>> Would it make sense to run this by your OT participants and/or partners? >>> Web developers in general? >>> >> >> The reason I don't think so is that this intent includes only more basic >> rules which supply a list of URLs, and extending the syntax to allow >> developers to select URLs from the links in the page is a future >> enhancement, albeit one I'm personally excited about. I don't expect that >> choices about how to express such selectors to cause compatibility issues >> with plain list-of-URLs rules. >> > > Oh, OK. Good to know! > > >> >> >>>> TAG review status >>>> >>>> First is complete, second is pending. >>>> >>>> Risks >>>> >>>> Interoperability and Compatibility >>>> >>> >>> Which of the 24 issues <https://github.com/WICG/nav-speculation/issues> >>> open on the repo is relevant for this intent? Can you highlight those that >>> may impact future compat and interop? >>> >> >> It's intended that such issues be labelled with speculation-rules or >> prefetch (indicating they affect one of the two pieces this would ship) and >> affects-compat. At the moment, the only such issue is this one >> <https://github.com/WICG/nav-speculation/issues/133>, which I believe is >> resolved as to prefetch. Looking again, any followup discussion (e.g. >> regarding subresources in prerenders) fit better in another issue, so I've >> closed that one. >> >> This issue <https://github.com/WICG/nav-speculation/issues/158> is not >> so labelled, though it's marginal and arguably could be. There is some >> ongoing discussion (which might become a whatwg/html issue shortly) >> connected to it about when user agents should observe modification and >> removal. While I would like to resolve this shortly, I expect the practical >> change to be relatively small and if anything in the direction of providing >> somewhat stronger guarantees rather than weaker ones. >> >> Most of the issues are with respect to either other features or >> enhancements which are likely to evolve in a way that is compatible with >> this. >> >> >>>> >>>> Gecko: No signal ( >>>> https://github.com/mozilla/standards-positions/issues/620) >>>> >>>> WebKit: No signal ( >>>> https://lists.webkit.org/pipermail/webkit-dev/2022-March/032158.html) >>>> >>>> Web developers: Some positive signal from a developer using the >>>> feature, and from a developer operating a site that is prefetched using >>>> this feature. >>>> >>> >>> It'd be good to externalize such feedback if at all possible. Any links? >>> >> >> I'll ask. >> >> >>>> Other signals: >>>> >>>> WebView Application Risks >>>> >>>> Does this intent deprecate or change behavior of existing APIs, such >>>> that it has potentially high risk for Android WebView-based applications? >>>> >>>> >>>> Debuggability >>>> >>>> Limited, though fixing crbug.com/1315706 should provide basic insight >>>> and I'm not aware of anything that would preclude us from adding more >>>> sophisticated developer tools integration in the future. >>>> >>>> Is this feature fully tested by web-platform-tests >>>> <https://chromium.googlesource.com/chromium/src/+/master/docs/testing/web_platform_tests.md> >>>> ? >>>> >>>> Tests are being landed at speculation-rules/prefetch/ in the WPT >>>> directory. We are continuing to work on adding more, though coverage in >>>> some areas will require the completion of some ongoing refactoring and >>>> additional test integration. >>>> >>>> Flag name >>>> >>>> The origin trial name is SpeculationRulesPrefetch. Some code >>>> internally calls this SpeculationRulesPrefetchProxy, but is not limited to >>>> proxied prefetches exclusively. >>>> >>>> Requires code in //chrome? >>>> >>>> Some code exists in chrome/, but refactoring work is underway to >>>> migrate as much of this as reasonable to content/. Some code specific to, >>>> e.g., the specific Google proxy service, will remain in chrome/. >>>> >>>> Tracking bug >>>> >>>> https://bugs.chromium.org/p/chromium/issues/detail?id=1173646 >>>> >>>> Estimated milestones >>>> >>>> M103 (Android) >>>> >>>> Since the current origin trial ends after M101, we would like to extend >>>> the experiment until shipping and request a gapless launch. >>>> >>>> I believe a gapless launch is justified here. The speculation rules API >>>> has been used by developers as part of this launch and the prerendering >>>> experiment >>>> <https://groups.google.com/a/chromium.org/g/blink-dev/c/Kpp6uJJRrqI/m/GTo_aF0qEQAJ>. >>>> There is an ongoing early access program >>>> <https://github.com/buettner/private-prefetch-proxy/issues/15> for >>>> publishers to opt in to receiving IP-obscured traffic enabled by this >>>> feature, and have received positive feedback about this program – which is >>>> planned to launch by default in coordination with this web platform side >>>> launch. Enforcing a gap here would interrupt this and require the private >>>> prefetch proxy team to notify affected partners (who are receiving prefetch >>>> traffic, rather than being direct users of this API), for no known benefit >>>> in this case. >>>> >>>> Shipping on desktop is not possible at this point due to extensions. We >>>> expect to file a separate Intent to Ship in the future. >>>> >>>> Link to entry on the Chrome Platform Status >>>> >>>> https://chromestatus.com/feature/5740655424831488 >>>> >>>> Links to previous Intent discussions >>>> >>>> Intent to prototype: >>>> https://groups.google.com/a/chromium.org/g/blink-dev/c/1q7Fp3zpjgQ >>>> >>>> Intent to Experiment: >>>> https://groups.google.com/a/chromium.org/g/blink-dev/c/Cw-hOjT47qI/m/EObn9-4MAgAJ >>>> >>>> Intent to Extend Experiment: >>>> https://groups.google.com/a/chromium.org/d/msgid/blink-dev/CACuR13cKaJB%3D2GQS4N3om1eSmuCVOY5zXchRCV8oCYkcq8kH0g%40mail.gmail.com >>>> <https://groups.google.com/a/chromium.org/d/msgid/blink-dev/CACuR13cKaJB=2gqs4n3om1esmucvoy5zxchrcv8ocykcq8k...@mail.gmail.com> >>>> >>>> >>>> This intent message was generated by Chrome Platform Status >>>> <https://chromestatus.com/>. >>>> -- >>>> 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/CACuR13cbVXw9nEo4zVwhGz_W65kfg0neYDqW3sMQC%2BYNzX6kfg%40mail.gmail.com >>>> <https://groups.google.com/a/chromium.org/d/msgid/blink-dev/CACuR13cbVXw9nEo4zVwhGz_W65kfg0neYDqW3sMQC%2BYNzX6kfg%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/CAL5BFfVcLV%3DpWo%2B0dbv027%3D-okgTtmQ7azCrBNsJsspmgTVByQ%40mail.gmail.com > <https://groups.google.com/a/chromium.org/d/msgid/blink-dev/CAL5BFfVcLV%3DpWo%2B0dbv027%3D-okgTtmQ7azCrBNsJsspmgTVByQ%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/CAL5BFfVLNKUNTFxFPwz_EatkxZOYO-oJwFnC%2BHBTVt4rXRtxxw%40mail.gmail.com.
