Re: [blink-dev] Intent to Ship: Android OSK resizes visual viewport by default + opt-out

LGTM2 under the same conditions! On Fri, Oct 7, 2022 at 2:23 AM Mike Taylor wrote: > I see that Emilio has approved > https://github.com/w3c/csswg-drafts/pull/7826, with a few suggestions. > > LGTM1 to ship w/ the review comments addressed and the PR landing (and > thanks for speccing it!). > >

Re: [blink-dev] Intent to Ship: Android OSK resizes visual viewport by default + opt-out

I see that Emilio has approved https://github.com/w3c/csswg-drafts/pull/7826, with a few suggestions. LGTM1 to ship w/ the review comments addressed and the PR landing (and thanks for speccing it!). On 9/23/22 10:17 PM, David Bokan wrote: Contact emails bo...@chromium.org

Re: [blink-dev] Intent to Implement and Ship: Trusted Types fromLiteral

On Wednesday, October 5, 2022 at 2:52:59 AM UTC-7 yoav...@chromium.org wrote: > On Thu, Sep 29, 2022 at 4:34 PM 'Daniel Vogelheim' via blink-dev < > blin...@chromium.org> wrote: > >> Contact emailsvoge...@chromium.org >> >> Specificationhttps://w3c.github.io/trusted-types/dist/spec/#trusted-htm

Re: [blink-dev] Re: Intent to Implement and Ship: Trusted Types fromLiteral

Hi Rick, On Tue, Oct 4, 2022 at 5:40 PM Rick Byers wrote: > This seems like a pretty minor and uncontroversial extension to trusted > types to me. But it also seems like a good time to just check-in on the > state of discussion around TrustedTypes with other vendors. > Our most recent check-ins

[blink-dev] Ready for Trial: Partitioning Storage, Service Workers, and Communication APIs

** *Contact emails* * wanderv...@chromium.org , m...@chromium.org , miketa...@chromium.org Explainer https://github.com/wanderview/quota-storage-partitioning/blob/main/explainer.md

Re: [blink-dev] Intent to Prototype and Ship: Snap border, outline and column-rule widths before layout

LGTM3, assuming we have useful tests. On 10/6/22 1:00 AM, Yoav Weiss wrote: LGTM2 On Wed, Oct 5, 2022 at 5:48 PM Philip Jägenstedt wrote: LGTM1 with some strings attached. We discussed this in the API owners meeting (present: Chris, Yoav, Mike, Daniel, me) Since this match

Re: [blink-dev] Intent to Deprecate and Remove: Private Network Access requests for subresources without proper preflight response

Exactly! Somewhere in the ballpark of 0.01% is my rough estimate. Cheers, Titouan On Thu, Oct 6, 2022 at 11:06 AM Yoav Weiss wrote: > So if the use counters are at 0.1-0.2%, we can expect only 0.007-0.014% to > be legitimate (roughly speaking)? > > On Thu, Oct 6, 2022 at 10:54 AM Titouan Rigoud

Re: [blink-dev] Intent to Experiment: Private Network Access preflight requests for subresources

Great, thanks! On Thu, Oct 6, 2022 at 9:33 AM Yoav Weiss wrote: > LGTM for a deprecation trial M109-M112 inclusive, assuming the removal > intent passes. > > On Wed, Oct 5, 2022 at 3:19 PM Titouan Rigoudy wrote: > >> On Wed, Oct 5, 2022 at 12:00 PM Yoav Weiss >> wrote: >> >>> >>> >>> On Wed, O

Re: [blink-dev] Intent to Deprecate and Remove: Private Network Access requests for subresources without proper preflight response

So if the use counters are at 0.1-0.2%, we can expect only 0.007-0.014% to be legitimate (roughly speaking)? On Thu, Oct 6, 2022 at 10:54 AM Titouan Rigoudy wrote: > Sure! I went through the UKM data from Android (where we can be reasonably > sure that extensions are not messing with the data) a

Re: [blink-dev] Intent to Deprecate and Remove: Private Network Access requests for subresources without proper preflight response

Sure! I went through the UKM data from Android (where we can be reasonably sure that extensions are not messing with the data) and classified a bunch of the top websites. I ended up classifying ~2/3 of the traffic in volume. Out of that, it seemed that ~7% was legitimate. There was no indication th

Re: [blink-dev] Intent to Experiment: Private Network Access preflight requests for subresources

LGTM for a deprecation trial M109-M112 inclusive, assuming the removal intent passes. On Wed, Oct 5, 2022 at 3:19 PM Titouan Rigoudy wrote: > On Wed, Oct 5, 2022 at 12:00 PM Yoav Weiss wrote: > >> >> >> On Wed, Oct 5, 2022 at 11:30 AM Jonathan Hao wrote: >> >>> >>> >>> On Wed, Oct 5, 2022 at 9