[blink-dev] Intent to Prototype: Delayed clipboard rendering

Contact emails ansol...@microsoft.com, sni...@microsoft.com, sa...@microsoft.com Explainer https://github.com/MicrosoftEdge/MSEdgeExplainers/blob/main/DelayedClipboard/DelayedClipboardRenderingExplainer.md

Re: [blink-dev] Re: Intent to Prototype: document.caretPositionFromPoint API

For what it's worth, some of the historical context around the 2009 changes is in WebApps TPAC 2009 minutes and Anne's folllowup email to www-style . -David On Tue, Jan

Re: [blink-dev] Intent to Extend Experiment: Soft Navigation Heuristics

LGTM to extend to 123 inclusive. On 1/22/24 10:00 PM, Ian Clelland wrote: Contact emails iclell...@chromium.org Explainer https://bit.ly/soft-navigation https://docs.google.com/document/d/1eUyQg3YLEmYjrTMC3p-F1MilECwCynhM6WIbIo05SPU/edit Specification

Re: [blink-dev] Intent to Deprecate non-standard declarative shadow DOM serialization

I guess a theoretical risk is that someone feature-checks for HTMLTemplateElement.shadowRootMode and then assumes the existence of getInnerHTML() based on that check. But given the lack of usage in the top sites I agree that this seems to not be an issue in practice. I saw that there's a

Re: [blink-dev] Re: Intent to Prototype: document.caretPositionFromPoint API

For the shadow DOM scenario, have we started the spec conversation about what behavior we want to end up at? I find the Gecko behavior a bit suspicious since it's piercing into potentially-closed shadow trees without having a prior reference to them. Maybe caretPositionFromPoint should not

Re: [blink-dev] Intent to Ship: PointerEvent.deviceId for Mult-Pen Inking

Thanks Rick and Robert! Rick, I agree that it would be relatively easy to change/deprecate deviceId. There are not too many devices at the moment that support multiple pens, and not many web apps either. I think the cost to the websites of not having Chrome support this for the foreseeable

Re: [blink-dev] Intent to Ship: PointerEvent.deviceId for Mult-Pen Inking

On Tue, Jan 23, 2024 at 2:00 PM Rick Byers wrote: > This is a pretty niche and tiny addition which matters a lot to probably a > couple websites in the world, and not at all to everyone else. It's a shame > that it's taken over a year of discussion on what to ship. Worst case and > we get this

Re: [blink-dev] Intent to Ship: PointerEvent.deviceId for Mult-Pen Inking

On Tue, Jan 23, 2024 at 1:00 PM Robert Flack wrote: > FWIW, in the PEWG call > last week > there was some question of how this relates to the pen customizations > proposal . I suppose

Re: [blink-dev] Intent to Ship: PointerEvent.deviceId for Mult-Pen Inking

This is a pretty niche and tiny addition which matters a lot to probably a couple websites in the world, and not at all to everyone else. It's a shame that it's taken over a year of discussion on what to ship. Worst case and we get this wrong and have something better in the future, I can't

Re: [blink-dev] Intent to Ship: PointerEvent.deviceId for Mult-Pen Inking

FWIW, in the PEWG call last week there was some question of how this relates to the pen customizations proposal . I suppose the general question is whether this should be an additional

Re: [blink-dev] Intent to Ship: PointerEvent.deviceId for Mult-Pen Inking

Hi all, any more questions or concerns? On Thursday, January 18, 2024 at 8:44:58 PM UTC-8 Sahir Vellani wrote: > Just to clarify, I've made the change in the deviceId verbiage in the > spec, not pointerId :) > > On Thursday, January 18, 2024 at 8:40:00 PM UTC-8 Sahir Vellani wrote: > >> I can't

Re: [blink-dev] Re: Intent to Ship: New ALPS code point

To be clarify, currently David is not working on the standardizing ALPS feature. On Tuesday, January 23, 2024 at 11:27:41 AM UTC-5 Victor Tan wrote: > Hi Erik, > We are actively working on it, but we need to put more efforts to > standardization. > In the last serval IETF, David is the

Re: [blink-dev] Re: Intent to Ship: New ALPS code point

Hi Erik, We are actively working on it, but we need to put more efforts to standardization. In the last serval IETF, David is the only person is talking about the ALPS feature. We'd glad to combine more efforts to move it forward to standardization. Bests, Victor On Monday, January 22,

Re: [blink-dev] Re: Intent to Ship: Allow for WebAuthn credential creation in a cross-origin iframe

It would be great to get an official response from WebKit and Mozilla to make sure we understand their position, but I don't think we should block further on it. I understand why they might have concerns given their engine's preference for embeds being anonymous. In Chromium we've been consistent

Re: [blink-dev] Re: Intent to Ship: Allow for WebAuthn credential creation in a cross-origin iframe

Fyi; I've retargeted this launch to M123 since it seems clear it won't get the necessary Blink approvals in time for M122 (which has already branched). On Wednesday, January 17, 2024 at 11:07:56 AM UTC-5 Stephen McGruer wrote: > Sounds great: > >

Re: [blink-dev] New API owner: Domenic Denicola

Congrats Domenic, and thanks for all your hard work. On Monday 22 January 2024 at 21:31:26 UTC jbr...@chromium.org wrote: > +1; Domenic makes a great addition to the API owners. > > On Mon, Jan 22, 2024 at 3:56 PM Johnny Stenback > wrote: > >> It makes me very happy to see Domenic added to API

Re: [blink-dev] Intent to Ship: Allow Cross-Origin Subframes to Send Automatic Beacons

Thanks Liam. This seems fine to me given that both parties need to opt in. LGTM1 On 1/22/24 6:10 PM, Liam Brady wrote: Hi Mike, "crossOrigin=true" is just a typo. "crossOrigin" was the original naming convention for "crossOriginExposed". It was renamed during code review, but I forgot to