LGTM2 with a similar disclaimer

On Wednesday, November 19, 2025 at 11:06:30 PM UTC+2 Mike Taylor wrote:

> Thanks Johann.
>
> LGTM1 to deprecate, but please come back before M150 for us to discuss 
> removal, so we have a better idea of the risk. And good luck driving usage 
> down.
> On 11/9/25 8:31 p.m., Johann Hofmann wrote:
>
> Thanks both, I think you're spot on with these concerns, both could cause 
> potential breakage and we'll have to work through them as part of the 
> deprecation. It should be possible to look at data for both of these cases, 
> although to Rick's point it may only be possible once we've worked through 
> the list of partners with Related Website Sets. 
>
> I'm very confident that outside of the known list of RWS users both 
> checking for existence of rSAFor and potentially problematic permissions 
> checks should be rare enough that I'd still like to seek API Owner approval 
> for this intent right now, also to unblock the outreach to these partners 
> with a reference to the deprecation process in Chrome.
>
> I believe that a viable worst-case option for the M150 timeline could be 
> to simply no-op the API (and the permissions API integration) without RWS 
> support while we track down remaining usage.
>
>
> On Mon, Nov 10, 2025 at 9:56 AM Mike Taylor <[email protected]> 
> wrote:
>
>> One concern I have is once we remove the `top-level-storage-access` 
>> permission, `navigator.permissions.query` will throw a TypeError. Of the 
>> ~1% of pages using rSAFor, do we know how many of them are using 
>> `navigator.permissions.query`?
>>
>> On 11/8/25 8:39 a.m., Rick Byers wrote:
>>
>> That said, your point about it applying just to the relatively small 
>> number of sites on the RWS list is a good one. I do expect you're right 
>> that it'll be easy to drive down usage and I'd also guess that the vast 
>> majority of usage would be gated by a feature detect, right? Just feels 
>> like we'll need a bit more evidence to demonstrate why we know this will be 
>> safe to remove given the high UseCounter.  
>>
>> Rick
>>
>> On Fri, Nov 7, 2025 at 1:52 PM Rick Byers <[email protected]> wrote:
>>
>>> This one seems a bit trickier than RWS itself because we have to reason 
>>> about the risk of code that assumes the API exists. I am supportive of 
>>> deprecation now, but perhaps we should come back to the data after RWS is 
>>> removed and see what the usage severity of breakage is in practice before 
>>> approving removal? 
>>>
>>> Rick
>>>
>>> On Fri, Nov 7, 2025, 12:35 p.m. 'Johann Hofmann' via blink-dev <
>>> [email protected]> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Apologies, I used the wrong Chromestatus link (the original feature 
>>>> status), this one is correct: 
>>>> https://chromestatus.com/feature/5162221567082496
>>>>
>>>> On Fri, Nov 7, 2025 at 2:44 PM Johann Hofmann <[email protected]> 
>>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Contact emails
>>>>>
>>>>> [email protected], [email protected]
>>>>>
>>>>> Explainer
>>>>>
>>>>> https://github.com/privacycg/requestStorageAccessFor 
>>>>>
>>>>> Specification
>>>>>
>>>>> https://privacycg.github.io/requestStorageAccessFor/ 
>>>>>
>>>>> Summary
>>>>>
>>>>> The requestStorageAccessFor (rSAFor) API is an extension to the 
>>>>> Storage Access API that allows a top-level site to request access to 
>>>>> unpartitioned ("first-party") cookies on behalf of embedded sites. 
>>>>> Browsers 
>>>>> will have discretion to grant or deny access, with mechanisms like 
>>>>> Related 
>>>>> Website Sets (RWS) membership as a potential signal. This allows for use 
>>>>> of 
>>>>> the Storage Access API by top-level sites. Following Chrome's 
>>>>> announcement 
>>>>> that the current approach to third-party cookies will be maintained, we 
>>>>> are 
>>>>> now planning to deprecate and remove rSAFor, as it is only usable in 
>>>>> Chrome 
>>>>> to request storage access between RWS sites. Related Website Sets will 
>>>>> also 
>>>>> be deprecated via a separate intent.  
>>>>>
>>>>> Blink component
>>>>>
>>>>> Blink>StorageAccessAPI 
>>>>> <https://bugs.chromium.org/p/chromium/issues/list?q=component:Blink%3EStorageAccessAPI>
>>>>>
>>>>> Web Feature ID
>>>>>
>>>>> None
>>>>>
>>>>> Motivation
>>>>>
>>>>> Chrome has announced 
>>>>> <https://privacysandbox.com/news/update-on-plans-for-privacy-sandbox-technologies/>
>>>>>  
>>>>> that the current approach to third-party cookies will be maintained. 
>>>>> rSAFor 
>>>>> currently has usage on about 0.95% of page loads 
>>>>> <https://chromestatus.com/metrics/feature/timeline/popularity/4332>, 
>>>>> but any website relying on successful invocation of rSAFor (i.e. the API 
>>>>> returns a promise that resolves) must also have registered a set on the 
>>>>> RWS GitHub 
>>>>> repository 
>>>>> <https://github.com/GoogleChrome/related-website-sets/blob/main/related_website_sets.JSON>.
>>>>>  
>>>>> Any invocations of rSAFor outside of an RWS currently returns a promise 
>>>>> that is rejected.
>>>>>
>>>>> Our metrics suggest that almost all of the usage of rSAFor is from 
>>>>> websites that have registered sets. We will continue to monitor usage and 
>>>>> aim to drive it down prior to removal by proactively informing set owners 
>>>>> of the deprecation timelines and request them to turn down usage. 
>>>>> Additionally, other browser engines have not signaled interest in 
>>>>> implementing the API, obviating any interoperability concerns.
>>>>>
>>>>> Debuggability
>>>>>
>>>>> N/A
>>>>>
>>>>> Requires code in //chrome?
>>>>>
>>>>> False
>>>>>
>>>>> Estimated milestones
>>>>>
>>>>> Deprecate in M144, and target M150 for removal. 
>>>>>
>>>>> Link to entry on the Chrome Platform Status
>>>>>
>>>>> https://chromestatus.com/feature/5122534152863744
>>>>>
>>>>> 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/CAD_OO4jr7zaQS-Sy%2B_DvWQsMWx_DMJ_sLsMe412Ca96Cg-uLyg%40mail.gmail.com
>>>>  
>>>> <https://groups.google.com/a/chromium.org/d/msgid/blink-dev/CAD_OO4jr7zaQS-Sy%2B_DvWQsMWx_DMJ_sLsMe412Ca96Cg-uLyg%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 [email protected].
>> To view this discussion visit 
>> https://groups.google.com/a/chromium.org/d/msgid/blink-dev/CAFUtAY8Q1KXUC0W9JMrpknW2o%2BPLdK7vi4d4dmhUZEssj1Gung%40mail.gmail.com
>>  
>> <https://groups.google.com/a/chromium.org/d/msgid/blink-dev/CAFUtAY8Q1KXUC0W9JMrpknW2o%2BPLdK7vi4d4dmhUZEssj1Gung%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 [email protected].
To view this discussion visit 
https://groups.google.com/a/chromium.org/d/msgid/blink-dev/6b775f83-1f63-4b8d-a0c6-46d0e6d722a0n%40chromium.org.

Reply via email to