LGTM3 to ship and deprecate (but not yet remove).

On Fri, Oct 24, 2025 at 8:36 AM Mike Taylor <[email protected]> wrote:

> LGTM2
> On 10/23/25 3:43 p.m., Vladimir Levin wrote:
>
> Hey, yes you will need a separate chromestatus entry for the removal
> (enforcement phase).
>
> LGTM1 for the new location of the parameter, new error name, and
> deprecating old location of the parameter and old error name (everything up
> to and including the warning phase)
>
> Thanks,
> Vlad
>
>
>
> On Wed, Oct 22, 2025 at 6:33 PM Nicolás Peña Moreno <[email protected]>
> wrote:
>
>> Ok, sounds good. Requesting lgtms for the warning phase then. Will we
>> need a separate chromestatus later to request approval for the enforcement
>> phase?
>>
>> On Wed, Oct 22, 2025 at 4:03 PM Vladimir Levin <[email protected]>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> Yes, that would be the plan. This intent when approved would cover both
>>> new nonce parameter and the error rename up to and including the "warning
>>> phase". A separate intent will be required for the "enforcement phase" (one
>>> intent for both error rename and nonce parameter).
>>>
>>> On Wed, Oct 22, 2025 at 12:42 PM Nicolás Peña Moreno <[email protected]>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> To clarify, are we approved for what we called the warning phase for
>>>> both the nonce parameter and the error rename? Then, we'd send a separate
>>>> intent for the enforcement phase for both of these, with data showing usage
>>>> drop. Is that correct?
>>>>
>>>> On Wed, Oct 22, 2025 at 11:22 AM Vladimir Levin <[email protected]>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> We discussed this at API owners:
>>>>>
>>>>> The general sense is that this intent may be doing too many things.
>>>>>
>>>>> We're happy to approve this intent as shipping the new location for
>>>>> the parameter and deprecating the old location (with a warning).
>>>>>
>>>>> However, we also believe that the removal (in Chrome 145) has to be a
>>>>> separate intent to remove requiring separate approvals. For the removal, 
>>>>> we
>>>>> would want to see stats to see that the usage is dropping due to
>>>>> deprecation low enough that the risk of removal is acceptable.
>>>>>
>>>>> Does that sound like a reasonable path forward?
>>>>>
>>>>> Thanks,
>>>>> Vlad
>>>>>
>>>>> On Monday, October 20, 2025 at 2:17:27 PM UTC-4 [email protected] wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> Responding for Suresh since he's OOO this week. For breakage, we
>>>>>> already have UKM metrics for any UI breakage (the error API usage from 
>>>>>> the
>>>>>> IDP side may cause the UI to look differently when some error occurs). I
>>>>>> noticed we don't have metrics on the JS getter side, so we will add those
>>>>>> since the RP side can also break with this change. We plan to have 
>>>>>> outreach
>>>>>> publicly through our devrel channels and also talking to the few IDPs 
>>>>>> that
>>>>>> use the error API. Since FedCM use mainly happens through SDKs, we're
>>>>>> confident that the combination of public announcement plus IDP outreach
>>>>>> will sufficiently mitigate the breakage, even if we find that today the
>>>>>> number of sites using this is currently high.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On Friday, October 17, 2025 at 12:59:49 PM UTC-4 [email protected]
>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On 10/17/25 10:39 a.m., suresh potti wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>> Contact emails
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> [email protected] Specification
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> https://github.com/w3c-fedid/FedCM/pull/768
>>>>>>> <https://github.com/w3c-fedid/FedCM/pull/768>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> https://github.com/w3c-fedid/FedCM/pull/498
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Summary
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Migration of nonce to params Field: The nonce parameter in
>>>>>>> navigator.credentials.get() is moving from a top-level field to the 
>>>>>>> params
>>>>>>> object for better API design, extensibility, and maintainability. This
>>>>>>> structured approach simplifies parsing for Identity Providers, supports
>>>>>>> future-proofing without versioning, and aligns with modern API patterns.
>>>>>>> For Relying Parties, the impact is minimal—they provide the same nonce
>>>>>>> value in a new location. Migration Plan Chrome will enforce this
>>>>>>> rule in two phases: Chrome 143 (Warning Phase): nonce accepted both
>>>>>>> at top level and inside params. Top-level usage triggers a console 
>>>>>>> warning. Chrome
>>>>>>> 145 (Enforcement Phase): Top-level nonce removed; must be passed
>>>>>>> within params. Rename code to error in IdentityCredentialError: The
>>>>>>> code attribute in IdentityCredentialError is renamed to error for 
>>>>>>> clearer
>>>>>>> semantics, better developer experience, and alignment with web 
>>>>>>> standards.
>>>>>>> This change reduces ambiguity and avoids conflicts with 
>>>>>>> DOMException.code.
>>>>>>> Additionally, error.code becomes error.error, retaining its DOMString 
>>>>>>> type. Migration
>>>>>>> Plan Chrome will enforce this rule in two phases: Chrome 143
>>>>>>> (Warning Phase): Both error and code attributes are supported.
>>>>>>> Using code triggers a console warning, guiding developers to migrate. 
>>>>>>> Chrome
>>>>>>> 145 (Enforcement Phase): Attribute code will be removed, only
>>>>>>> attribute error remains. Update code before this version to prevent
>>>>>>> breakage. Blink component
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Blink>Identity>FedCM
>>>>>>> <https://issues.chromium.org/issues?q=customfield1222907:%22Blink%3EIdentity%3EFedCM%22>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Web Feature ID
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> fedcm <https://webstatus.dev/features/fedcm>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> TAG review
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> None
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Risks
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Interoperability and Compatibility
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Chrome 143 allows old and new patterns with warnings. By Chrome 145,
>>>>>>> top-level nonce and code attributes are removed, requiring params for 
>>>>>>> nonce
>>>>>>> and error for IdentityCredentialError. Failure to migrate breaks
>>>>>>> authentication and error handling, runtime issues, and degraded user
>>>>>>> experience.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Can you say more about the expected impact here? The severity of
>>>>>>> breakage sounds pretty high - do we have a sense of how many sites will 
>>>>>>> be
>>>>>>> affected, etc?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Gecko: No signal WebKit: No signal Web developers: Supportive,
>>>>>>> comments from Ben Vandersloot in
>>>>>>> https://github.com/w3c-fedid/meetings/blob/main/2025/2025-07-08-FedCM-notes.md
>>>>>>>  WebView
>>>>>>> application risks
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> FedCM does not work in WebView.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Ongoing technical constraints
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> None
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Debuggability
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Same as other FedCM features. The network view in devtools would be
>>>>>>> especially helpful for debugging this feature.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Will this feature be supported on all six Blink platforms (Windows,
>>>>>>> Mac, Linux, ChromeOS, Android, and Android WebView)?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> NoFedCM in general is not supported on webview. Supported on all
>>>>>>> other blink platforms.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Is this feature fully tested by web-platform-tests
>>>>>>> <https://chromium.googlesource.com/chromium/src/+/main/docs/testing/web_platform_tests.md>
>>>>>>> ?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Yes
>>>>>>> https://wpt.fyi/results/fedcm/fedcm-error-attribute?label=experimental&label=master
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Flag name on about://flags
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> fedcm-nonce-in-params, fedcm-error-attribute
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Finch feature name
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> FedCmNonceInParams, FedCmErrorAttribute
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Requires code in //chrome?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> False
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Estimated milestones
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Shipping on desktop
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> 145
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Shipping on Android
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> 145
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Link to entry on the Chrome Platform Status
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> https://chromestatus.com/feature/5124072820310016
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> 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 [email protected].
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> To view this discussion visit
>>>>>>> https://groups.google.com/a/chromium.org/d/msgid/blink-dev/3dffeb38-f53f-4e49-90e6-3fefc96ea32an%40chromium.org
>>>>>>> <https://groups.google.com/a/chromium.org/d/msgid/blink-dev/3dffeb38-f53f-4e49-90e6-3fefc96ea32an%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 [email protected].
> To view this discussion visit
> https://groups.google.com/a/chromium.org/d/msgid/blink-dev/a4fa2612-b996-4457-864f-d7a0704381ce%40chromium.org
> <https://groups.google.com/a/chromium.org/d/msgid/blink-dev/a4fa2612-b996-4457-864f-d7a0704381ce%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 [email protected].
To view this discussion visit 
https://groups.google.com/a/chromium.org/d/msgid/blink-dev/CAFUtAY9qQH2yAuGWqmc1io94cdcjek3xBmZicTtniX3CEtcdew%40mail.gmail.com.

Reply via email to