LGTM2 then. :(
On Wed, Jun 22, 2022 at 8:58 AM Yoav Weiss <yoavwe...@chromium.org> wrote:
> LGTM1
>
> On Wednesday, June 15, 2022 at 11:54:30 PM UTC+2 Daniel Clark wrote:
>
>> *> What's the feature detection/activation story here? Can developers use
>> the feature while it's partially supported? What would be the implications
>> of that?*
>>
>>
>>
>> Feature detection can be done by checking for the presence of
>> CSS.highlights:
>>
>>
>>
>> function supportsHighlightAPI() {
>>
>> return !!CSS.highlights;
>>
>> }
>>
>>
>>
>> For use cases where the highlights are key to the user experience (e.g.
>> when used for an app’s custom find-on-page implementation), developers
>> should fall back to a polyfill for unsupported browsers. For use cases
>> where highlights are only added for stylistic purposes, they could be
>> omitted altogether when there isn’t support.
>>
>>
>>
>> A polyfill could be built for the feature that works by wrapping
>> “highlighted” content in styled spans. This could get tricky to implement
>> for cases involving many nested highlights (which is one thing that the API
>> makes much easier), but it would work fine for most scenarios.
>>
>>
>>
>> *> We could send a ping notifying that Chromium is planning to ship.*
>>
>>
>>
>> I pinged the mozilla/standards-positions thread about this last week,
>> still waiting to hear back
>> https://github.com/mozilla/standards-positions/issues/482#issuecomment-1152601522.
>> @Emilio <emi...@mozilla.com>, is there anything you’d be able to share
>> about this?
>>
>>
>>
>> *> Can you ask for an explicit signal to see what their plans are on that
>> front? Is there an interop risk from their incomplete implementation?*
>>
>>
>>
>> I sent a mail
>> <https://lists.webkit.org/pipermail/webkit-dev/2022-June/032303.html> to
>> webkit-dev, awaiting response. I just took another look at their
>> implementation, and they’ve done some work to bring it closer to the
>> current state of the spec since last I checked. The remaining major
>> difference I see is just the lack of support for live Ranges. I expect that
>> they will close this gap prior to shipping the feature. If they don’t then
>> the difference could also be feature-detected by polyfills:
>>
>>
>>
>> function supportsLiveRangeHighlights() {
>>
>> try {
>>
>> new Highlight(new Range());
>>
>> return true;
>>
>> } catch(ex) {
>>
>> return false;
>>
>> };
>>
>> }
>>
>>
>>
>> -- Dan
>>
>>
>>
>> *From:* Yoav Weiss <yoavwe...@chromium.org>
>> *Sent:* Wednesday, June 15, 2022 1:32 AM
>> *To:* blink-dev <blink-dev@chromium.org>
>> *Cc:* Manuel Rego <r...@igalia.com>; Sanket Joshi (EDGE) <
>> sa...@microsoft.com>; Fernando Fiori <ffi...@microsoft.com>; Bo Cupp <
>> pc...@microsoft.com>; Luis Juan Sanchez Padilla <
>> luis.snc...@microsoft.com>; Delan Azabani <dazab...@igalia.com>; Emilio
>> Cobos Alvarez <emi...@mozilla.com>; Rick Byers <rby...@chromium.org>;
>> flo...@rivoal.net <flor...@rivoal.net>; Daniel Clark <
>> dan...@microsoft.com>
>> *Subject:* Re: [blink-dev] Intent to Ship: Custom Highlight API
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> On Thursday, June 9, 2022 at 6:55:06 AM UTC+2 Manuel Rego wrote:
>>
>> I'm biased here as I've been working on this feature myself, so I cannot
>> give an official LGTM.
>>
>> Thanks for all the work since the previous intent thread, I believe this
>> is now in a way better status to ship.
>>
>> I'd be fine giving a LGTM with the following caveats:
>> * As mentioned at the end of the email, HighlightOverlayPainting flag
>> gets enabled before shipping this (that flag fixes lots of bugs
>> regarding paining of CSS highlight pseudos).
>> * The following CSSWG issue gets resolved:
>> https://github.com/w3c/csswg-drafts/issues/6774
>> <https://nam06.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fgithub.com%2Fw3c%2Fcsswg-drafts%2Fissues%2F6774&data=05%7C01%7Cdaniec%40microsoft.com%7C7feca281f397491f36cc08da4ea98e04%7C72f988bf86f141af91ab2d7cd011db47%7C1%7C0%7C637908787402809854%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C3000%7C%7C%7C&sdata=FVgZmds%2BpoWNSGjSR1DFoh3G1dwFwes5vZD65iEDdtA%3D&reserved=0>
>> It looks like there's an agreement already but it'd be nice to confirm
>> it, as this might change behavior if a different decision is made.
>>
>> Other than that I've just some minor comments inline.
>>
>> On 08/06/2022 19:42, 'Daniel Clark' via blink-dev wrote:
>> > Risks
>> >
>> >
>> > Interoperability and Compatibility
>> >
>> > Low risk: This feature received positive support from Safari and
>> Firefox
>> > at TPAC 2019. Safari is implementing it, Firefox has not yet made any
>> > clear indication on implementation.
>>
>>
>>
>> What's the feature detection/activation story here? Can developers use
>> the feature while it's partially supported? What would be the implications
>> of that?
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > /Gecko/: No clear signal
>> > (https://github.com/mozilla/standards-positions/issues/482
>> <https://nam06.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fgithub.com%2Fmozilla%2Fstandards-positions%2Fissues%2F482&data=05%7C01%7Cdaniec%40microsoft.com%7C7feca281f397491f36cc08da4ea98e04%7C72f988bf86f141af91ab2d7cd011db47%7C1%7C0%7C637908787402809854%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C3000%7C%7C%7C&sdata=zEMcL5OP4APO1YKe2SGFBKlASHSGQOy1bi%2FreiGIBY4%3D&reserved=0>
>> > <https://github.com/mozilla/standards-positions/issues/482
>> <https://nam06.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fgithub.com%2Fmozilla%2Fstandards-positions%2Fissues%2F482&data=05%7C01%7Cdaniec%40microsoft.com%7C7feca281f397491f36cc08da4ea98e04%7C72f988bf86f141af91ab2d7cd011db47%7C1%7C0%7C637908787402809854%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C3000%7C%7C%7C&sdata=zEMcL5OP4APO1YKe2SGFBKlASHSGQOy1bi%2FreiGIBY4%3D&reserved=0>>)
>>
>>
>> We could send a ping notifying that Chromium is planning to ship.
>>
>> > /WebKit/: Positive. WebKit implemented the feature behind an
>> > experimental flag in 99:
>> >
>> https://developer.apple.com/safari/technology-preview/release-notes/#:~:text=Added%20support%20for%20rendering%20highlights%20specified%20in%20CSS%20Highlight%20API
>> <https://nam06.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fdeveloper.apple.com%2Fsafari%2Ftechnology-preview%2Frelease-notes%2F%23%3A~%3Atext%3DAdded%2520support%2520for%2520rendering%2520highlights%2520specified%2520in%2520CSS%2520Highlight%2520API&data=05%7C01%7Cdaniec%40microsoft.com%7C7feca281f397491f36cc08da4ea98e04%7C72f988bf86f141af91ab2d7cd011db47%7C1%7C0%7C637908787402809854%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C3000%7C%7C%7C&sdata=Afgj4HPaUxUdpB1KhwgAh4uq1%2B%2F9l1Nj29kGDfxjIWs%3D&reserved=0>
>> > <
>> https://developer.apple.com/safari/technology-preview/release-notes/#:~:text=Added%20support%20for%20rendering%20highlights%20specified%20in%20CSS%20Highlight%20API
>> <https://nam06.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fdeveloper.apple.com%2Fsafari%2Ftechnology-preview%2Frelease-notes%2F%23%3A~%3Atext%3DAdded%2520support%2520for%2520rendering%2520highlights%2520specified%2520in%2520CSS%2520Highlight%2520API&data=05%7C01%7Cdaniec%40microsoft.com%7C7feca281f397491f36cc08da4ea98e04%7C72f988bf86f141af91ab2d7cd011db47%7C1%7C0%7C637908787402809854%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C3000%7C%7C%7C&sdata=Afgj4HPaUxUdpB1KhwgAh4uq1%2B%2F9l1Nj29kGDfxjIWs%3D&reserved=0>>.
>>
>>
>> I agree that it's positive WebKit has a WIP implementation. But just to
>> clarify the status Safari has an old version of this spec implemented,
>> and the implementation is not complete and not up to date regarding the
>> spec (e.g. https://bugs.webkit.org/show_bug.cgi?id=229797
>> <https://nam06.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fbugs.webkit.org%2Fshow_bug.cgi%3Fid%3D229797&data=05%7C01%7Cdaniec%40microsoft.com%7C7feca281f397491f36cc08da4ea98e04%7C72f988bf86f141af91ab2d7cd011db47%7C1%7C0%7C637908787402809854%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C3000%7C%7C%7C&sdata=xrJWnSsyiHCIaUe193YhCB%2BbzwShWhZgjIYBE2kMfBY%3D&reserved=0>
>> ).
>>
>>
>>
>> Can you ask for an explicit signal to see what their plans are on that
>> front? Is there an interop risk from their incomplete implementation?
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> Cheers,
>> Rego
>>
>> --
> 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/5947b08e-67d2-45bf-a468-c78b619de02fn%40chromium.org
> <https://groups.google.com/a/chromium.org/d/msgid/blink-dev/5947b08e-67d2-45bf-a468-c78b619de02fn%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.
To view this discussion on the web visit
https://groups.google.com/a/chromium.org/d/msgid/blink-dev/CAOMQ%2Bw_mb9kxenfdMfkW8cAWrxVWyAuLLPvJt2m109g9dQwdwQ%40mail.gmail.com.
