{Note: I previously sent what should have been an intent to deprecate and
remove for this feature. However, that one failed to make it to the right
dashboards due to the subject line being incorrect. See that prior
conversation right here
<https://groups.google.com/a/chromium.org/g/blink-dev/c/it0X7BOimKw/m/xbtIbEzaAQAJ?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer>
-
it has some good discussion particularly about the use counters, which have
improved a lot since January.}
Contact emailsmas...@chromium.org

ExplainerNone

SpecificationNone

Summary

The prototype implementation (which was shipped in 2020 and then
shape-changed in 2023) contained a method called `getInnerHTML()` that
could be used to serialize DOM trees containing shadow roots. That part of
the prototype was not standardized with the rest of declarative shadow dom,
and only recently has it reached spec consensus (
https://github.com/whatwg/html/issues/8867). As part of that consensus, the
shape of the getInnerHTML API changed. This feature represents the
deprecation of the old, shipped `getInnerHTML()` method. The replacement is
called `getHTML()`, and it shipped in M125. See
https://chromestatus.com/feature/5102952270528512 for that feature.

{Note: This should be the last (!) intent related to the "old" declarative
shadow DOM features.}

Blink componentBlink>DOM>ShadowDOM
<https://bugs.chromium.org/p/chromium/issues/list?q=component:Blink%3EDOM%3EShadowDOM>

TAG reviewNone

TAG review statusNot applicable

Risks


Interoperability and Compatibility

The use counter for getInnerHTML() (
https://chromestatus.com/metrics/feature/timeline/popularity/3874) peaked
at 0.05% of page loads using this function as of January 2024, and dropped
precipitously toward 0.01% in May, 2024. This is presumably due to the
shipment of its replacement, getHTML(). While 0.01% still represents high
usage for deprecation, the numbers were significantly worse for the
deprecation of the old `shadowroot` attribute, and the removal of that
feature generated zero bug reports. It is my strong belief that since this
feature is only shipped in Chrome, the vast majority of usage is guarded by
feature checks. So this deprecation should be safer than it would seem from
the numbers. I'd like to remove this feature in M127 in code, with a
killswitch (a re-enable switch really) in case of problems.


*Gecko*: No signal

*WebKit*: No signal

*Web developers*: No signals

*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?

None


Debuggability

None


Will this feature be supported on all six Blink platforms (Windows, Mac,
Linux, ChromeOS, Android, and Android WebView)?Yes

Is this feature fully tested by web-platform-tests
<https://chromium.googlesource.com/chromium/src/+/main/docs/testing/web_platform_tests.md>
?Yes

Flag name on chrome://flagsElementGetInnerHTML

Finch feature nameElementGetInnerHTML

Requires code in //chrome?False

Tracking bughttps://crbug.com/1519972

Estimated milestones
Shipping on desktop 127
Shipping on Android 127
Shipping on WebView 127

Anticipated spec changes

Open questions about a feature may be a source of future web compat or
interop issues. Please list open issues (e.g. links to known github issues
in the project for the feature specification) whose resolution may
introduce web compat/interop risk (e.g., changing to naming or structure of
the API in a non-backward-compatible way).
None

Link to entry on the Chrome Platform Status
https://chromestatus.com/feature/5081733588582400?gate=5088451454304256

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/CAM%3DNeDjZJvRAcpSj2cAWi6uW7yYmDV8HdMkqQjFOS3q%3DidB9fQ%40mail.gmail.com.

Reply via email to