Intent to prototype: CSS property `text-underline-position`

[Jonathan Kew]

[re-sending, with a web-platform-tests link included - sorry!]

Summary: This property offers authors added control of the positioning 
of underlines, primarily for vertical text (where conventions differ as 
to whether an "underline" should appear to the left or right of the 
text), and also for horizontal text where a lower underline may be 
desirable (e.g. to avoid clashing with frequent subscript characters in 
math or scientific content).


Bug: https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=770780

Standard: 
https://drafts.csswg.org/css-text-decor-3/#text-underline-position-property


Platform coverage: all

Preference: layout.css.text-underline-position.enabled

DevTools bug: n/a

Other browsers: Available in Chrome (& related browsers) since v.33, 
according to https://caniuse.com/#search=text-underline-position; also 
supported in IE/Edge.


web-platform-tests: 
https://wpt.fyi/results/css/css-text-decor/parsing?label=master=text-underline-position


Secure contexts: Not restricted - this is a simple CSS property, not 
restricted to secure contexts in existing browsers.


Is this feature enabled by default in sandboxed iframes? Yes.
If allowed, does it preserve the invariants in terms of what sandboxed 
iframes can do? Yes.


___
dev-platform mailing list
dev-platform@lists.mozilla.org
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-platform

Re: Intent to prototype: Character encoding detector

[Boris Zbarsky]

On 12/2/19 7:42 AM, Henri Sivonen wrote:

Since there isn't a spec and Safari doesn't implement the feature,
there are no cross-vendor tests.


Could .tentative tests be created here, on the off chance that we do 
create a spec for this at some point?


-Boris
___
dev-platform mailing list
dev-platform@lists.mozilla.org
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-platform

Re: Changes to tab min-width

[Boris Zbarsky]

On 12/5/19 6:51 AM, smurf4234332342342342342...@gmail.com wrote:

This re-introduced setting doesn't seem to exist


It's there in about:config... are you not seeing it there?

-Boris
___
dev-platform mailing list
dev-platform@lists.mozilla.org
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-platform

mozilla-central is now on C++17

[Nathan Froyd]

Bug 1560664 [0] stuck on central, so all of mozilla-central is compiled as
C++17 now.

Most C++17 language features should be usable; whether library features are
fully implemented across all of our supported compilers/standard libraries
is yet to be determined [5].  I will be updating our C++ usage page [4]
shortly.

The feature people will be most excited about is probably "if constexpr"
[1][2], though I have heard expressions of happiness about structured
bindings [3].

As part of this effort, we have upgraded our minimum version requirements
for clang to 5 and for GCC to 7.1.  clang 5 is known to have issues with
some C++17 language features (e.g. inline variables), and clang 6 is known
to miscompile Firefox; bumping to require at least clang 7 in the
not-too-distant future is a definite possibility.

I don't anticipate that we would upgrade to C++20 for at least another year
or so.

Thanks to everybody who contributed patches and reviews for this effort,
especially Marco Castelluccio for resolving some involved issues with
coverage tests.

Happy hacking,
-Nathan

[0] https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1560664
[1] http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2016/p0128r1.html
[2] http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2016/p0292r1.html
[3] http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2016/p0144r2.pdf
[4]
https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Mozilla/Using_CXX_in_Mozilla_code
[5] As usual, please continue to prefer Firefox equivalents for standard
library entities unless there is good reason to do otherwise (e.g.
interoperability with third-party code), as the Firefox equivalents
typically perform better, have improved safety features, and/or integrate
better with other machinery (e.g. leak checking).
___
dev-platform mailing list
dev-platform@lists.mozilla.org
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-platform

Re: Intent to Implement and Ship: Make MOZ_QUIET the default, require opt-in for DOMWINDOW/DOCSHELL logs

[Tom Ritter]

This landed in https://hg.mozilla.org/mozilla-central/rev/724d7b936078

To replicate the prior output, use MOZ_LOG="DocShellAndDOMWindowLeak:3"
Because it now includes the MOZ_LOG prefix, any custom scripts you had to
parse the output will need to be updated.

-tom


On Fri, Nov 8, 2019 at 2:44 PM Tom Ritter  wrote:
>
>> In https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1592297 I plan/hope to
>> remove MOZ_QUIET and turn off the DOCSHELL/DOMWINDOW logging by default.
>> It will automatically be enabled in browser-chrome tests where it is
>> needed. (It actually will no longer be possible to disable it when running
>> those tests also.)
>>
>> Once this lands, MOZ_QUIET will no longer do anything, and if you want
>> this
>> output you will need to explicitly set a new env var.  (Current idea is
>> MOZ_LOG_WINDOWS_DOCSHELLS but feel free to tell me what color for the
>> bikeshed in phabricator, I have no preference.)
>>
>> I'm sending this before I finish the requested changes in phabricator to
>> give folks an opportunity to raise objections; I hope to land it mid/late
>> next week.
>>
>> -tom
>> ___
>> dev-platform mailing list
>> dev-platform@lists.mozilla.org
>> https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-platform
>>
>
___
dev-platform mailing list
dev-platform@lists.mozilla.org
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-platform

Intent to prototype: CSS property `text-underline-position`

[Jonathan Kew]

Summary: This property offers authors added control of the positioning 
of underlines, primarily for vertical text (where conventions differ as 
to whether an "underline" should appear to the left or right of the 
text), and also for horizontal text where a lower underline may be 
desirable (e.g. to avoid clashing with frequent subscript characters in 
math or scientific content).


Bug: https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=770780

Standard: 
https://drafts.csswg.org/css-text-decor-3/#text-underline-position-property


Platform coverage: all

Preference: layout.css.text-underline-position.enabled

DevTools bug: n/a

Other browsers: Available in Chrome (& related browsers) since v.33, 
according to https://caniuse.com/#search=text-underline-position; also 
supported in IE/Edge.


web-platform-tests:

Secure contexts: Not restricted - this is a simple CSS property, not 
restricted to secure contexts in existing browsers.


Is this feature enabled by default in sandboxed iframes? Yes.
If allowed, does it preserve the invariants in terms of what sandboxed 
iframes can do? Yes.


___
dev-platform mailing list
dev-platform@lists.mozilla.org
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-platform

Re: Proposed W3C Charter: Web Payments Working Group

[Marcos Caceres]

On Wednesday, December 4, 2019 at 1:58:54 AM UTC+11, L. David Baron wrote:
> Please reply to this thread if you think there's something we should
> say as part of this charter review, or if you think we should
> support or oppose it.

Feedback I send a little while back:
https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-payments-wg/2019Nov/.html

My proposed changes were accepted in the charter. FWIW, I'm personally happy 
with the charter and the scope. I'd like for Mozilla to continue to support 
this WG. 
___
dev-platform mailing list
dev-platform@lists.mozilla.org
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-platform

Re: Intent to unship: TLS 1.0 and TLS 1.1

[grahamperrin]

On Thursday, 12 September 2019 05:03:57 UTC+1, Martin Thomson  wrote:

…
 
> [2] https://hacks.mozilla.org/2019/05/tls-1-0-and-1-1-removal-update/

…

From the linked post: 

>> … Safari, Firefox, Edge and Chrome are removing support for TLS 1.0 and 1.1 
>> in March of 2020. …

Is that (timeline) still a _shared_ intent – for all four browsers? 

Re: the screenshot at 

 I do like how things are shaping up in Firefox 71.0 with 
security.tls.version.min set (or preset) to 3.
___
dev-platform mailing list
dev-platform@lists.mozilla.org
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-platform

Re: Proposed W3C Charter: Service Workers Working Group

[Anne van Kesteren]

On Tue, Dec 3, 2019 at 3:58 PM L. David Baron  wrote:
> The W3C is proposing a revised charter for:
>
>   Service Workers Working Group
>   https://www.w3.org/2019/11/proposed-sw-wg-charter-2019.html
>   https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-new-work/2019Nov/0004.html

A couple of us looked at Background Sync and thus far have not been
able to come up with a way to get informed consent from users for
executing scripts in the background in a way that is non-intrusive and
doesn't lead to abuse. Given that, I think Mozilla should object to it
being in the charter. Background Fetch has a similar issue, but
(thanks to Youenn Fablet for the insight) there might be a way to
salvage that, by running the "fetches completed" script on next visit.
This might require some API changes though so hopefully the charter
can indicate that somehow. (Bikeshed: Background Downloads.)

(The description for Service Workers, "This specification defines an
API to enable applications to take advantage of persistent background
processing.", also seems wrong or perhaps multiple uses of
"background" are used in the same text, but development of SW remains
important of course.)
___
dev-platform mailing list
dev-platform@lists.mozilla.org
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-platform