[blink-dev] Intent To Prototype: Controlled Frame API for Isolated Web Apps

2023-01-30 Thread 'Chase Phillips' via blink-dev
Contact emails c...@chromium.org, odejes...@chromium.org Explainer https://github.com/chasephillips/controlled-frame Summary Adds a Controlled Frame API available only to Isolated Web Apps (IWAs). This work will add a new Controlled Frame API which is only available to Isolated Web Apps

Re: [blink-dev] Re: [discuss-webrtc] Deprecated "track" and "stream" stats are unshipped in M109.

2023-01-30 Thread Sudheer Boynapally
Hi Henrik, Just want to confirm if this is rolled-back today at 9am PST ? On Sat, Jan 28, 2023 at 1:59 AM Henrik Boström wrote: > Hi Anna, yes the experiment is being rolled back to 0% Stable (it's still > 50% on Canary/Beta though). > The rollback has already been submitted, but

Re: [blink-dev] Re: Intent to Ship: Add optional submitter parameter to FormData constructor

2023-01-30 Thread 'Jon Jensen' via blink-dev
Ok FYI issue filed: https://github.com/w3ctag/design-reviews/issues/812 Jon On Monday, January 30, 2023 at 1:20:25 PM UTC-7 Jon Jensen wrote: > Thanks Mike and Alex! What's the best way to send an FYI to TAG? Post > something to https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-tag/, or is there a >

Re: [blink-dev] Re: Intent to Ship: Add optional submitter parameter to FormData constructor

2023-01-30 Thread 'Jon Jensen' via blink-dev
Thanks Mike and Alex! What's the best way to send an FYI to TAG? Post something to https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-tag/, or is there a more formal mechanism? Jon On Monday, January 30, 2023 at 12:10:30 PM UTC-7 sligh...@chromium.org wrote: > LGTM2 with the nit that this should be

Re: [blink-dev] Re: Intent to Ship: Add optional submitter parameter to FormData constructor

2023-01-30 Thread Alex Russell
Just file it as an issue in their GH and mention that it's an FYI: https://github.com/w3ctag/design-reviews/issues On Mon, Jan 30, 2023 at 11:18 AM Jon Jensen wrote: > Thanks Mike and Alex! What's the best way to send an FYI to TAG? Post > something to

Re: [blink-dev] Re: Intent to Ship: Add optional submitter parameter to FormData constructor

2023-01-30 Thread Alex Russell
LGTM2 with the nit that this should be sent to the TAG as an FYI. We don't need their review on everything, but we* do* need them to see everything we see so that they can help guide folks in a consistent way in future. Best, Alex On Mon, Jan 30, 2023 at 9:06 AM Mike Taylor wrote: > LGTM1 -

Re: [blink-dev] Intent to Ship: CSS Nesting

2023-01-30 Thread Alex Russell
+1 to Rick's notes about "*why the hurry*"; there is a high cost to not doing the good we can do in a timely way, and shipping important features is how we make the world better -- and also worse, which is why we hold the train in many cases, but only for a limited time. Transpilers are a tax, not

Re: [blink-dev] Re: Intent to Ship: Add optional submitter parameter to FormData constructor

2023-01-30 Thread Mike Taylor
LGTM1 - this is a simple, useful addition. (Also kudos for writing patches in 3 engines, Jon) On 1/30/23 11:26 AM, 'Jon Jensen' via blink-dev wrote: Quick update, the WebKit PR has now been merged On Monday, January 30, 2023 at 8:50:49 AM UTC-7 Jon Jensen wrote: Contact emails

[blink-dev] Re: Intent to Ship: Add optional submitter parameter to FormData constructor

2023-01-30 Thread 'Jon Jensen' via blink-dev
Quick update, the WebKit PR has now been merged On Monday, January 30, 2023 at 8:50:49 AM UTC-7 Jon Jensen wrote: > Contact emailsjo...@netflix.com > > ExplainerNone > > Specificationhttps://xhr.spec.whatwg.org/#interface-formdata > > Summary > > Allow passing a submit button to the FormData

[blink-dev] Intent to Ship: Add optional submitter parameter to FormData constructor

2023-01-30 Thread 'Jon Jensen' via blink-dev
Contact emailsj...@netflix.com ExplainerNone Specificationhttps://xhr.spec.whatwg.org/#interface-formdata Summary Allow passing a submit button to the FormData constructor. If the button has a name or is an image button, it will contribute to the form data set. This makes it possible to create

Re: [blink-dev] Intent to Deprecate and Remove: WebRTC's RTCStats of type "track" and "stream".

2023-01-30 Thread Henrik Boström
On Monday, January 30, 2023 at 11:16:59 AM UTC+1 Harald Alvestrand wrote: I'm not sure an enterprise policy is appropriate - I see the same problem with sunsetting the policy as with sunsetting the stat in general, and usage of enterprise policies is (as far as I know) far more opaque to us

Re: [blink-dev] Intent to Deprecate and Remove: WebRTC's RTCStats of type "track" and "stream".

2023-01-30 Thread 'Harald Alvestrand' via blink-dev
I'm not sure an enterprise policy is appropriate - I see the same problem with sunsetting the policy as with sunsetting the stat in general, and usage of enterprise policies is (as far as I know) far more opaque to us than origin trials or Finch feature usage. On Mon, Jan 30, 2023 at 11:13 AM

Re: [blink-dev] Intent to Deprecate and Remove: WebRTC's RTCStats of type "track" and "stream".

2023-01-30 Thread Henrik Boström
On Friday, January 27, 2023 at 7:24:58 PM UTC+1 Johnny Stenback wrote: Is there an enterprise policy in place for this deprecation already? If not, adding one seems appropriate given the challenges of rolling out even simple fixes in some enterprise environments. One does not exist at the