Re: [blink-dev] Intent to Ship: Attribution Reporting Feature Bundle: Additional Verbose Debug Reports, Further Gating Source Verbose Debug Reports, Splitting the Attribution Rate Limit

LGTM3 On Friday, May 3, 2024 at 1:34:21 PM UTC-4 Chris Harrelson wrote: > Thanks for these mini-explainers, they clarified what is changing for me! > > LGTM2 > > On Fri, May 3, 2024 at 9:31 AM 'Akash Nadan' via blink-dev < > blin...@chromium.org> wrote: > >> Hi Alex, >> >> Thanks for the

Re: [blink-dev] PSA: Browser text zoom on Android will now work like it does on desktop

Hi Jonathan, In doing bug triage, I'm randomly coming across multiple web developers confused by this behavior. Do we need a blog post perhaps to help raise awareness and

[blink-dev] Re: Intent to Ship: Async Clipboard API: Read unsanitized HTML format

By the way, for others trying to follow the history, the correct link to the original thread on this is https://groups.google.com/a/chromium.org/g/blink-dev/c/oiPCXHy9kRE/m/YS2sxbIQAAAJ On Tue, Dec 5, 2023 at 1:56 PM Rick Byers wrote: > Thanks for getting this cleaned up and clarified, and for

[blink-dev] Re: Intent to Ship: Async Clipboard API: Read unsanitized HTML format

Thanks for getting this cleaned up and clarified, and for getting the spec PR landed. This now seems quite trivial to me - just extending the existing unsanitized reading capability into an option of the async clipboard API. LGTM2 On Wed, Nov 29, 2023 at 4:39 PM Alex Russell wrote: > Thanks for

Re: [blink-dev] Re: Intent to Experiment: IP Protection Phase 0

LGTM, no concerns from me with experimenting. It seems like user and enterprise controls are in place, and since this is just about proxying 3P resources that reduces the risk of it impacting either site functionality or network filtering policy. Note that Chrome already has another (fully

Re: [blink-dev] Re: [EXTERNAL] Re: Intent to Ship: Async Clipboard API: Read unsanitized HTML

Hi Anupam, I've spent an hour or so trying to follow the history of this discussion, there's obviously been a lot of debate in this space over the years. I think your answer to Thomas's question is what really clarified this specific proposal to me - you're specifically interested in the case

Re: [blink-dev] Intent to Ship: MediaCapabilities: Query HDR support with decodingInfo()

Looks pretty straightforward to me, especially with Safari already shipping. LGTM1 On Wed, Oct 18, 2023 at 7:18 PM Dale Curtis wrote: > Contact emailsv...@microsoft.com, gw...@microsoft.com, > gur...@microsoft.com, dalecur...@chromium.org > > Explainer >

Re: [blink-dev] Intent to Ship: Permissions policy violation reports

Looks like a pretty straightforward combination of these established patterns, I like it! LGTM1 On Wed, Oct 25, 2023 at 8:42 AM Ian Clelland wrote: > > > On Wed, Oct 25, 2023 at 4:35 AM Yoav Weiss wrote: > >> >> >> On Tue, Oct 24, 2023 at 7:24 PM Ian Clelland >> wrote: >> >>> Contact

Re: [blink-dev] Intent to ship: The Login Status API and its use in FedCM

FWIW since the PR has landed, the correct link to reference the spec is https://fedidcg.github.io/FedCM/#browser-api-login-status. Since WebKit has expressed some interest in using this API in other scenarios than just FedCM I imagine there may be a request at some point to move it out of the

Re: [blink-dev] Intent to Ship: First-party sets

Thanks for the updates Chris! On Fri, Sep 29, 2023 at 12:36 PM Chris Fredrickson wrote: > Hi all, > > We've concluded our metrics analysis, and are rolling this feature out to > 100% of Chrome Stable clients. (We mitigated one regression in browser > startup time, and confirmed that all other

Re: [blink-dev] Intent to Ship: Attribution Reporting features (change registration limit, remove 1hr delay)

LGTM3 On Mon, Sep 18, 2023, 3:10 p.m. Mike Taylor wrote: > LGTM2 > On 9/16/23 10:28 AM, Yoav Weiss wrote: > > LGTM1 > > On Mon, Sep 11, 2023 at 10:58 PM 'Akash Nadan' via blink-dev < > blink-dev@chromium.org> wrote: > >> Contact emails >> >> johni...@chromium.org, csharri...@chromium.org >> >>

Re: [blink-dev] Intent to Ship: Enrollment for Privacy Sandbox

LGTM3 On the compat front this is technically a breaking change for shipped APIs. Normally we'd want to see a more thorough a compat analysis to back up the claim of sites not being functionally broken. However, running through a compat analysis in my head I think

Re: [blink-dev] Intent to Ship: Payment handler minimal header UX

LGTM3 as not subject to blink process. But thanks for the heads up! On Wed, Sep 13, 2023, 5:50 p.m. Stephen Mcgruer wrote: > Thanks Mike! We were following through on the I2S process because we did > an I2E for this feature as a way to let folks verify that the UX change > wouldn't cause

Re: [blink-dev] Re: Intent to Implement and Ship: User-Agent Client Hints on Android WebView

Sorry for the delay, LGTM2 I'm surprised you need a ramp-up for this. New APIs are generally safe so we usually don't finch them. But if you'd rather do a finch roll-out for extra safety, I have no objection. Rick On Thu, Aug 24, 2023 at 9:10 AM Peter Beverloo wrote: > Non-API OWNER LGTM to

Re: [blink-dev] Re: Intent to Deprecate: Remove "Sanitizer API MVP"

Note that our compat principles say "Generally we avoid breaking any use cases which cannot be shown to have a reasonable alternate implementation". While 0.00492% is tiny, it's still

Re: [blink-dev] Re: Intent to Prototype: Web environment integrity API

ection here will come from the respectful and thoughtful comments on this thread and elsewhere (including your blog <https://liberda.nl/weblog/trust-no-client/>, which I quite enjoyed), not the intimidation tactics occurring on the GitHub repo and elsewhere. Sorry for not being more c

Re: [blink-dev] Re: Intent to Prototype: Web environment integrity API

As one of the API owners and chromium community leaders, I'd just like to chime in on this personally with a meta-point: Thank you all for the thoughtful and constructive debate in this forum. As I'm sure you know, this topic has gotten a lot of disrespectful, abusive and overly-simplified

Re: [blink-dev] Intent to Prototype & Ship: Clear-Site-Data header wildcard syntax

Sounds good, thanks! I defer to your judgement on the future compat risk. Worst case "*" has to be redefined not to include "executionContexts", but that wouldn't be the ugliest wart in the web :-) LGTM1 On Tue, Jul 18, 2023 at 2:28 PM Ari Chivukula wrote: > Replies inline. > ~ Ari Chivukula

Re: [blink-dev] Intent to Prototype & Ship: Clear Client Hints via Clear-Site-Data header

Seems like a pretty minor and straightforward addition to an already shipped feature to me. LGTM1 On Mon, Jul 17, 2023 at 4:39 PM Ari Chivukula wrote: > Updating subject to reflect intent. > > ~ Ari Chivukula (Their/There/They're) > > On Mon, Jul 17, 2023, 14:35 Ari Chivukula wrote: > >>

Re: [blink-dev] Intent to Prototype & Ship: Clear-Site-Data header wildcard syntax

Seems like a pretty tiny addition to an already shipped feature. Just one question on future compat: On Mon, Jul 17, 2023 at 7:34 AM Ari Chivukula wrote: > Contact emails > > aric...@chromium.org, miketa...@chromium.org, yoavwe...@chromium.org > > Specification > >

Re: [blink-dev] Intent to Experiment: Zstd Content-Encoding

Seems like a great thing to experiment with! LGTM On Sat, Jul 15, 2023 at 7:33 AM Nidhi Jaju wrote: > Hi Mike, > > The proposed experiment is to run an A/B experiment on Canary/Dev, Beta, > and then 1% of Stable on M117. > > Best, > Nidhi > > On Sat, Jul 15, 2023 at 12:32 AM Mike Taylor >

Re: [blink-dev] Intent to Ship: [URL] Allow "%00" as a valid URL path

Agreed this is bugfix level and not "an API change". Of course bug fixes can also trigger compat issues, but it seems very unlikely to me that anyone could reasonably depend on chromium failing to parse a URL of this obscure form (when other engines don't). LGTM2 On Mon, Jul 17, 2023 at 2:25 PM