Re: [blink-dev] Intent to Implement and Ship: CSS pseudo-class ":picture-in-picture"

I think that reviving this 3.5 years later warrants getting LGTMs again, as the landscape may have changed. With that said, *LGTM1*, as it seems this would now be catching up with Safari. On Wed, Dec 7, 2022 at 8:00 AM 'François Beaufort' via blink-dev < blink-dev@chromium.org> wrote: > Original

Re: [blink-dev] Intent to Implement and Ship: CSS pseudo-class ":picture-in-picture"

LGTM2, for the same reason. That said, there are a number of open bugs against the repository. Have you done any triage against them to see whether any might be compatibility issues in the future? -mike On Wed, Dec 7, 2022 at 9:51 AM Yoav Weiss wrote: > I think that reviving this 3.5 years la

[blink-dev] Re: Intent to Ship: Unprefix -webkit-image-set

LGTM1 Thanks for working on this!! Looking at wpt.fyi, other implementations are passing the test suite for this to varying degrees. Does this intent cover full compliance with the test suite? (e.g. `type()`, `url()`, non `x` descriptors, and maybe other dimensions) Or does it only cover the u

[blink-dev] Re: Intent to Ship: CSS Trigonometric functions

LGTM1 On Tuesday, December 6, 2022 at 4:48:55 AM UTC+1 Seokho Song wrote: > Contact emailsseo...@chromium.org > > Explainer > https://github.com/DevSDK/css-trigonometric-functions/blob/main/Explainer.md > It'd be good to augment the explainer with examples of things that developers want to achi

Re: [blink-dev] Intent to Extend Deprecation Trial: Restrict "private network requests" for subresources from public websites to secure contexts.

Can you clarify the deprecation trial timeline so far? The "intent to extend experiment" you linked to indicates experimentation until M106. Is that correct? On Tue, Dec 6, 2022 at 3:35 PM 'Yifan Luo' via blink-dev < blink-dev@chromium.org> wrote: > Contact emailstito...@chromium.org, cl...@chrom

Re: [blink-dev] Re: Intent to Ship: Unprefix -webkit-image-set

On 07/12/2022 12:37, Yoav Weiss wrote: > LGTM1 > > Thanks for working on this!! Looking at wpt.fyi, other implementations > are passing the test suite for this to varying degrees. Does this intent > cover full compliance with the test suite? (e.g. `type()`, `url()`, non > `x` descriptors, and ma

Re: [blink-dev] Intent to Extend Deprecation Trial: Restrict "private network requests" for subresources from public websites to secure contexts.

Hi Yoav, Here's the "intent to extend experiment" thread to M109. https://groups.google.com/a/chromium.org/g/blink-dev/c/PCfDnIV1cOw/ Best, Jonathan On Wed, Dec 7, 2022 at 12:29 PM Yoav Weiss wrote: > Can you clarify the deprecation trial timeline so far? The "intent to > extend experiment" yo

[blink-dev] Intent to Ship: font-variant-alternates and the @font-feature-values at-rule

Contact emailsdr...@chromium.org Explainer / Specification https://drafts.csswg.org/css-fonts-4/#font-variant-alternates-prop (This section contains details examples including images on how this feature enables easier activation of font features.) Summary font-variant-alternates enables simpler

Re: [blink-dev] Intent to Extend Deprecation Trial: Restrict "private network requests" for subresources from public websites to secure contexts.

Thanks for the link! :) Do y'all have usage stats trends and/or insights into how far we are from being able to turn off the deprecation trial? On Wed, Dec 7, 2022 at 3:02 PM Jonathan Hao wrote: > Hi Yoav, > > Here's the "intent to extend experiment" thread to M109. > https://groups.google.com/

Re: [blink-dev] Intent to Ship: font-variant-alternates and the @font-feature-values at-rule

LGTM1, I'm very happy to see this ship. I tried out https://roettsch.es/montecarlo.html in Firefox and Safari, and those are some very swishy swashes, looking forward to that demo also working in Chrome :) And the tests are here: https://wpt.fyi/results/css/css-fonts?label=master&label=experimenta

Re: [blink-dev] Intent to Ship: font-variant-alternates and the @font-feature-values at-rule

LGTM2 On Wed, Dec 7, 2022, 7:41 AM Philip Jägenstedt wrote: > LGTM1, I'm very happy to see this ship. I tried out > https://roettsch.es/montecarlo.html in Firefox and Safari, and those are > some very swishy swashes, looking forward to that demo also working in > Chrome :) > > And the tests are

Re: [blink-dev] Intent to Ship: font-variant-alternates and the @font-feature-values at-rule

LGTM3 On Wed, Dec 7, 2022 at 4:44 PM Chris Harrelson wrote: > LGTM2 > > On Wed, Dec 7, 2022, 7:41 AM Philip Jägenstedt > wrote: > >> LGTM1, I'm very happy to see this ship. I tried out >> https://roettsch.es/montecarlo.html in Firefox and Safari, and those are >> some very swishy swashes, looki

Re: [blink-dev] Re: Intent to Ship: CSS Trigonometric functions

LGTM2 On 12/7/22 4:25 AM, Yoav Weiss wrote: LGTM1 On Tuesday, December 6, 2022 at 4:48:55 AM UTC+1 Seokho Song wrote: Contact emails seo...@chromium.org Explainer https://github.com/DevSDK/css-trigonometric-functions/blob/main/Explainer.m

Re: [blink-dev] Re: Intent to Ship: CSS Trigonometric functions

For atan2(), is the behavior you intent to ship (using its double value) per spec and does it match what Firefox and Safari do? Here are the tests: https://wpt.fyi/results/css/css-values/acos-asin-atan-atan2-computed.html?label=master&label=experimental&product=chrome&product=firefox&product=safari

Re: [blink-dev] Re: Intent to Ship: CSS Trigonometric functions

Actually, LGTM3 if the tests in acos-asin-atan-atan2-computed.html pass or match Firefox+Safari, no need to wait further in that case. Additionally, if the CSSWG updates the spec on atan2() in the coming weeks, can you circle back to this thread with what you recommend we should do? If we can upda

[blink-dev] Intent to Prototype: HTTPS Upgrades

Contact emailscth...@chromium.org, dadr...@chromium.org Explainerhttps://github.com/dadrian/https-upgrade/blob/main/explainer.md Specification Summary Automatically and optimistically upgrade all main-frame navigations to HTTPS, with fast fallback to HTTP. Blink componentInternals>Network

Re: [blink-dev] Intent to Ship: Anonymous iframes

LGTM3 On 11/30/22 7:19 AM, Yoav Weiss wrote: LGTM2 On Wed, Nov 30, 2022 at 4:17 PM Rick Byers wrote: Thanks for driving the naming issue to resolution Arthur. Given the lack of engagement on the mozilla standards position issue, I don't see anything else concrete that should block

Re: [blink-dev] Intent to Implement & Ship: User-Agent Reduction Phase 5 (platform and OsCpu reduction)

Hi blink-dev, UA Reduction Phase 5 is currently ramping up to 5% of the stable release population. We will monitor the change has any impacts. Thanks. Victor On Thursday, December 1, 2022 at 3:55:50 PM UTC-5 Mike Taylor wrote: > Thanks Ziling. We're unlikely to make the change just ahead of t

Re: [blink-dev] Re: Intent to Ship: Unprefix -webkit-image-set

On Wed, Dec 7, 2022 at 5:39 AM Manuel Rego Casasnovas wrote: > > On 07/12/2022 12:37, Yoav Weiss wrote: > > LGTM1 > > > > Thanks for working on this!! Looking at wpt.fyi, other implementations > > are passing the test suite for this to varying degrees. Does this intent > > cover full compliance w

Re: [blink-dev] Intent to Ship: Speculation Rules (Prefetch)

Follow up to yesterday's PSA: We're aware of a case that relied on the bug to be able to use cross-site prefetching. This CL emulates the originally shipped behaviour for cases where the prefetch attempt would be rejected by th

[blink-dev] Re: Intent to Prototype: Speculation rules referrer policy key

This intent now also involves the reintroduction of the enforcement of the sufficiently-strict referrer policy requirement. See this intent for context. On Wednesday, November 23, 2022 at 4:49:07 p.m. UTC-5 Kev

Re: [blink-dev] Intent to Ship: Speculation Rules (Prefetch)

It sounds to me like there is no change on the key risks evaluated by API owners, and there's no indication to me that API owner approval was limited just to Android support. I don't think we have the process well defined in cases like this, but we have other examples where API owners have approved

[blink-dev] Intent to Ship: FileSystemHandle remove() method

Contact emails asu...@chromium.org Explainer https://github.com/a-sully/fs/pull/1 Specification https://github.com/whatwg/fs/pull/9 Summary Currently, it is not possible to remove a file or directory given its handle. You must obtain the handle of the parent directory and call FileSystemDir

Re: [blink-dev] Intent to Ship: Speculation Rules (Prefetch)

I'm also supportive - LGTM2 (and no need for a new intent). On 12/7/22 3:18 PM, Rick Byers wrote: It sounds to me like there is no change on the key risks evaluated by API owners, and there's no indication to me that API owner approval was limited just to Android support. I don't think we have

Re: [blink-dev] Intent to Prototype: *Streaming* declarative shadow DOM

+1; great news on the streaming front. On the potential attribute name change, is it not possible to introduce streaming behaviour under the old name? Best, Alex On Tuesday, December 6, 2022 at 10:24:20 PM UTC-8 yoav...@chromium.org wrote: > Great news!! :) > > On Tue, Dec 6, 2022 at 7:05 PM

Re: [blink-dev] Intent to Prototype: *Streaming* declarative shadow DOM

On Wed, Dec 7, 2022 at 5:33 PM Alex Russell wrote: > +1; great news on the streaming front. > > On the potential attribute name change, is it not possible to introduce > streaming behaviour under the old name? > Thanks! Yes, it's totally possible to introduce streaming without changing the attri

[blink-dev] Re: Intent to Ship: Unprefix -webkit-image-set

Thanks Yoav! This intent only covers the unprefixing. Further interop improvements will come later. Regards, Traian On Wed, Dec 7, 2022 at 3:37 AM Yoav Weiss wrote: > LGTM1 > > Thanks for working on this!! Looking at wpt.fyi, other implementations are > passing the test suite for this to var

Re: [blink-dev] Re: Intent to Ship: Unprefix -webkit-image-set

Hi Rego, > I do wonder what's the goal of removing the prefix, if we're not also > improving the spec compliance and interoperability? > It's an incremental step in the direction of spec compliance and interoperability. Further improvements will follow. This is similar to how Firefox handled the

Re: [blink-dev] Re: Intent to Ship: Unprefix -webkit-image-set

Thanks Stefan! That makes sense. We do plan to address some of the other issues. Having bugs filed would be helpful in prioritizing what we should focus on next. Regards, Traian On Wed, Dec 7, 2022 at 2:12 PM Stefan Zager wrote: > > > On Wed, Dec 7, 2022 at 5:39 AM Manuel Rego Casasnovas > w

Re: [blink-dev] Intent to Ship: Speculation Rules (Prefetch)

LGTM3 Aside: we should really define in the process that it's fine to reuse old intents for platform expansions, and ensure that our tools deal with it properly.. On Thu, Dec 8, 2022 at 12:57 AM Mike Taylor wrote: > I'm also supportive - LGTM2 (and no need for a new intent). > > On 12/7/22 3:18