[blink-dev] Intent to Prototype: ContentVisibilityAutoStateChanged event

Contact emailsvmp...@chromium.org Explainer https://github.com/vmpstr/web-proposals/blob/main/explainers/cv-auto-event.md Specification Summary This proposal is to add an event that would fire on a content-visibility: auto element when the rendering state of the element changes due to any of th

[blink-dev] Intent to Ship: ContentVisibilityAutoStateChanged event

Contact emailsvmp...@chromium.org Explainer https://github.com/vmpstr/web-proposals/blob/main/explainers/cv-auto-event.md Specification https://drafts.csswg.org/css-contain-2/#content-visibility-auto-state-changed Summary This proposal is to add an event that would fire on a content-visibility:

Re: [blink-dev] Intent to Ship: ContentVisibilityAutoStateChanged event

Thanks for pointing this out. I've updated the explainer to reflect the discussion we had on a11y. Thanks, Vlad On Wed, Aug 10, 2022 at 8:57 AM Manuel Rego Casasnovas wrote: > > On 08/08/2022 20:48, Vladimir Levin wrote: > > Explainer > > > > > https:/

[blink-dev] Intent to Continue Experimenting: Shared Element Transitions

Contact emailsvmp...@chromium.org, chris...@chromium.org, voll...@chromium.org, khushalsa...@chromium.org Explainer https://github.com/vmpstr/shared-element-transitions/blob/main/README.md Summary Shared Element Transitions is a proposal for a new script API that allows a simple set of transitio

Re: [blink-dev] Intent to Continue Experimenting: Shared Element Transitions

; *LGTM* to extend the experiment till M96 (inclusive) >> >> On Mon, Aug 30, 2021 at 7:09 PM Vladimir Levin >> wrote: >> >>> Contact emailsvmp...@chromium.org, chris...@chromium.org, >>> voll...@chromium.org, khushalsa...@chromium.org >>> &

[blink-dev] Intent to Prototype: renderpriority attribute

Contact emails *vmp...@chromium.org *Explainer *https://github.com/WICG/display-locking/blob/main/explainers/update-rendering.md * Summary *The web includes a number of features and heuristics (such as content

[blink-dev] Intent to Prototype: mix-blend-mode: plus-lighter

Contact emailsvmp...@chromium.org, khushalsa...@chromium.org, jakearchib...@chromium.org Explainerhttps://jakearchibald.com/2021/dom-cross-fade/ Specification https://drafts.fxtf.org/compositing-2/#porterduffcompositingoperators_plus_lighter Summary This proposal adds a plus-lighter value to th

Re: [blink-dev] Intent to Prototype: mix-blend-mode: plus-lighter

pport this in the future. Thanks, Vlad On Wed, Jan 5, 2022 at 2:20 AM Manuel Rego Casasnovas wrote: > > > On 16/12/2021 21:44, Vladimir Levin wrote: > > Gecko: No signal > > Have we asked for signals? https://bit.ly/blink-signals > > > WebKit: Shipped/Shipping >

[blink-dev] Intent to Ship: mix-blend-mode: plus-lighter

Contact emailsvmp...@chromium.org, khushalsa...@chromium.org, jakearchib...@chromium.org Explainerhttps://jakearchibald.com/2021/dom-cross-fade/ Specificationhttps://drafts.fxtf.org/compositing-2/#mix-blend-mode Summary This proposal adds a plus-lighter value to the mix-blend-mode property. Plu

Re: [blink-dev] Intent to Ship: Adding Cross-site Ancestor Chain Bit to CHIPS Partition Key

On Mon, Mar 11, 2024 at 1:42 PM Aaron Selya wrote: > Contact emails > > se...@chromium.org, dylancut...@chromium.org, kaustub...@chromium.org > > > Explainer > > Keying of "CHIPS" cookies should align with other state: > > > >

[blink-dev] Intent to Ship: CSS view-transition-class and class VT argument syntax

Contact emailsvmp...@chromium.org, nrosent...@chromium.org Explainer https://github.com/vmpstr/web-proposals/blob/main/explainers/view-transition-classes.md Specification https://drafts.csswg.org/css-view-transitions-2/#view-transition-class-prop Summary This feature introduces a new CSS proper

Re: [blink-dev] Intent to Ship: View Transitions: transition types

; >>> LGTM1 >>> >>> On Thursday, November 9, 2023 at 7:05:57 PM UTC+1 Vladimir Levin wrote: >>> >>> >>> >>> On Thu, Nov 9, 2023, 12:54 Mike Taylor wrote: >>> >>> On 11/8/23 3:53 PM, Vladimir Levin wrote: >>> >

Re: [blink-dev] Capture Skia Commands From Chromium

Hey Steven, I don't think there is any way you would be able to get the Skia commands without modifying the code. Traces don't typically contain the necessary draw commands. There are a few places you can get those commands, mostly in the cc directory, or thereabouts. I recommend watching Life of

Re: [blink-dev] Intent to Prototype: Document-Isolation-Policy

This does sound a bit unfortunate. My understanding is that at least this behavior is deterministic, right? That is, either the same-origin frames will be able to script each other or they won't and this will happen consistently (based on the agent cluster key). An observation I had is that it see

Re: [blink-dev] Intent to Prototype: Document-Isolation-Policy

still be some possibility with just spamming 3p iframes but that likely exists today anyway Thanks! Vlad > > Charlie > > On Thu, Apr 4, 2024 at 8:05 AM Vladimir Levin wrote: > >> This does sound a bit unfortunate. My understanding is that at least this >> behavior is

Re: [blink-dev] Intent to Extend Experiment: Protected Audience Bidding & Auction Services

On Thu, Apr 4, 2024 at 12:19 PM 'Russ Hamilton' via blink-dev < blink-dev@chromium.org> wrote: > Contact emails > > pauljen...@chromium.org, behamil...@google.com > > Explainer > > Chrome: > https://github.com/WICG/turtledove/blob/main/FLEDGE_browser_bidding_and_auction_API.md > > Services: > http

Re: [blink-dev] Intent to Ship: Declarative shadow DOM serialization

On Thu, Apr 4, 2024 at 6:54 PM Mason Freed wrote: > Contact emailsmas...@chromium.org > > Explainer > https://github.com/whatwg/html/issues/8867#issuecomment-1856696628 > > Specificationhttps://html.spec.whatwg.org/#dom-element-gethtml > > Summary > > The prototype implementation (which was shipp

Re: [blink-dev] Intent to Ship: Support Cross-Origin Shared Storage Worklets

On Fri, Apr 19, 2024 at 12:52 PM Yao Xiao wrote: > *Contact emails* > cam...@chromium.org > jkar...@chromium.org > yao...@chromium.org > rohitgu...@google.com > ashame...@google.com > > *Explainer* > https://github.com/WICG/shared-storage > > *Specification* > https://wicg.github.io/shared-storag

Re: [blink-dev] Intent to Ship: Automatic Fullscreen Content Setting

On Wed, May 8, 2024 at 7:46 PM Mike Wasserman wrote: > Contact emails > > m...@chromium.org, fugu-...@chromium.org > > Explainer > > https://github.com/explainers-by-googlers/html-fullscreen-without-a-gesture > > Specification > > https://fullscreen.spec.whatwg.org/#dom-element-requestfullscreen

Re: [blink-dev] Intent to Ship: Automatic Fullscreen Content Setting

nfigured to not show popups (i.e., the user >agent has a "popup blocker" enabled) > - The user agent may inform the user that a popup has been blocked. > > > On Thursday, May 9, 2024 at 7:30:09 AM UTC-7 Vladimir Levin wrote: > >> On Wed, May 8, 2024 at

Re: [blink-dev] Intent to Experiment: Keyboard-focusable scroll containers Opt Out

On Fri, May 10, 2024 at 2:18 PM Mike Taylor wrote: > Is there a chromestatus entry associated with this intent? There's a lot > of information missing from this Intent (see > https://groups.google.com/a/chromium.org/g/blink-dev/c/LwgSKPBivuM/m/0dRsXWhBAgAJ > as what is typical) - could you reply

Re: [blink-dev] Request for Deprecation Trial: Media Previews opt-out

On Fri, May 10, 2024 at 2:40 PM mark a. foltz wrote: > Contact emailsmfo...@chromium.org, bryantchand...@chromium.org > > ExplainerNone > > Specification > https://docs.google.com/document/d/1ZnX2JROjr9l4y2_OPMpfVlLOo-A5cQzD4mWarj9kXQ0/edit > > Design docs > > https://docs.google.com/document/d/1

Re: [blink-dev] Intent to Ship: Multi-argument alt text in CSS Generated Content

On Mon, May 13, 2024 at 2:23 PM 'Daniel Clark' via blink-dev < blink-dev@chromium.org> wrote: > *Contact emails* > > dan...@microsoft.com > > *Explainer* > > None > > *Specification* > > > https://drafts.csswg.org/css-content-3/#valdef-content---string--counter--attr > and https://drafts.csswg.org

Re: [blink-dev] Intent to Ship: Deprecate Mutation Events

I recall that some of this usage was feature detected: if mutation events are supported, use them; otherwise, use something else. Unfortunately, that makes it difficult to estimate the expected number of breakages. I agree though that it would be nice to understand the type of usage that still exis

Re: [blink-dev] Intent to Ship: CSS font-size-adjust with the two-value syntax

On Thu, May 16, 2024 at 10:02 AM ChangSeok Oh wrote: > Contact emails > changseok...@bytedance.com, changs...@chromium.org > > Explainer > None > > Specification > https://www.w3.org/TR/css-fonts-5/#font-size-adjust-prop > > Summary > > The font-size-adjust CSS property enhances readability consi

Re: [blink-dev] Intent to Ship: Automatic Fullscreen Content Setting

;>>>>> It would be nice for the PR to be reviewed and approved, even without >>>>>> other stakeholder support. >>>>>> >>>>>> Additionally - the explainer mentions a few options for feature >>>>>> detection. Any prog

Re: [blink-dev] Intent to Ship: Deprecate Mutation Events

On Thu, May 16, 2024 at 11:56 AM Mason Freed wrote: > > On Wed, May 15, 2024 at 9:36 PM Vladimir Levin > wrote: > >> I recall that some of this usage was feature detected: if mutation events >> are supported, use them; otherwise, use something else. Unfortunately, that

Re: [blink-dev] Intent to Ship: Deprecate Mutation Events

rience. >>> >> Thanks. At least two votes for straight-to-100%, so that's what I'll do. > FWIW, I think both strategies have pros and cons, but I do support the straight-to-100% in this case LGTM1 to this plan, while being ready to adapt to things that come up i

Re: [blink-dev] Request for Deprecation Trial: Media Previews opt-out

once the Deprecation Trial is >>> finished? (Or are you just requesting an Origin Trial to temporarily >>> disable something, and expect it to be re-enabled in the future?) >>> >>> Something that approaches an Explainer would probably be helpful here - >>> th

Re: [blink-dev] Intent to Deprecate and Remove: Deprecate old CSS custom state syntax

have any interest in > looking at whether the deprecated syntax works or not because the other > browsers didn't have it before and neither did we until a couple years ago. > I meant I hope that existing use is either feature-detected or it's using both properties. In either cas

Re: [blink-dev] Intent to Ship: CSS font-size-adjust with the two-value syntax

-adjust-013.html both look like minor > differences, but it seems like it only happens on Linux (Chrome) and not > Windows (Edge)? > > > > There are also 3 failing subtests in font-size-adjust-computed.html, > does that depend on resolving one of the spec issues? Or can we

Re: [blink-dev] Intent to Ship: Deprecation of non-standard declarative shadow DOM serialization

On Fri, May 24, 2024 at 7:42 PM Mason Freed wrote: > {Note: I previously sent what should have been an intent to deprecate and > remove for this feature. However, that one failed to make it to the right > dashboards due to the subject line being incorrect. See that prior > conversation right here

Re: [blink-dev] Intent to Ship: The ServiceWorker static routing API not condition support

On Fri, May 24, 2024 at 3:43 AM Yoshisato Yanagisawa < yyanagis...@chromium.org> wrote: > Contact emails > > yyanagis...@chromium.org > > Explainer > > https://github.com/WICG/service-worker-static-routing-api > > Specification > > https://w3c.github.io/ServiceWorker/#dom-routercondition-not > > D

Re: [blink-dev] Intent to Ship: Third-party Cookie Grace Period Opt-Out

Hey Anton, Can you please request reviews for the various chips [image: chips.png] Thanks! Vlad On Mon, May 27, 2024 at 3:09 AM Yoav Weiss (@Shopify) < yoavwe...@chromium.org> wrote: > LGTM2 > > On Fri, May 24, 2024 at 5:53 PM Anton Maliev wrote: > >> I see the concern. The 3P can use document

Re: [blink-dev] Intent to Experiment: Keyboard-focusable scroll containers Opt Out

ites to migrate their components, we >> are requesting a Deprecation Trial. This trial (called >> “KeyboardFocusableScrollersOptOut”), when enabled, will disable the >> KeyboardFocusableScrollers feature. To give adequate time, we’d like to let >> this deprecation trial run fo

Re: [blink-dev] Intent to Ship: Third-party Cookie Grace Period Opt-Out

LGTM3 On Tue, May 28, 2024 at 12:55 PM Ben Kelly wrote: > > On Tue, May 28, 2024 at 10:59 AM Vladimir Levin > wrote: > >> Hey Anton, >> >> Can you please request reviews for the various chips >> [image: chips.png] >> > > Done. Thanks. > > &

Re: [blink-dev] Intent to Ship: Deprecation of non-standard declarative shadow DOM serialization

On Tue, May 28, 2024 at 12:30 PM Mason Freed wrote: > > > On Mon, May 27, 2024 at 8:15 AM Vladimir Levin > wrote: > >> Interoperability and Compatibility >>> >>> The use counter for getInnerHTML() ( >>> https://chromestatus.com/metrics/feature/

Re: [blink-dev] Intent to Ship: Unrestricted WebUSB (available only to Isolated Web Apps)

On Wed, May 29, 2024 at 9:49 AM Mike Taylor wrote: > LGTM1 to ship this for IWAs only. > On 5/22/24 2:11 PM, Reilly Grant wrote: > > LGTM as an IWA OWNER (3x LGTM from Blink API OWNERS are still required > according to the IWA-specific API launch process >

Re: [blink-dev] Intent to Experiment: Keyboard-focusable scroll containers Opt Out

On Wed, May 29, 2024 at 10:47 AM Daniel Bratell wrote: > That is 7 milestones. > > End at 132 inclusive instead? > Oops, off-by-one strikes again! Yes, 132 inclusive is the right endpoint > /Daniel > On 2024-05-28 18:58, Vladimir Levin wrote: > > LGTM to experiment f

Re: [blink-dev] Re: Intent to Ship: Importmap integrity

LGTM2 On Wed, May 29, 2024 at 11:41 AM Mike Taylor wrote: > LGTM1 > On 5/24/24 3:13 PM, Yoav Weiss (@Shopify) wrote: > > > > On Fri, May 24, 2024 at 7:12 PM Panos Astithas > wrote: > >> >> >> On Wed, May 22, 2024 at 2:16 AM Yoav Weiss (@Shopify) < >> yoavwe...@chromium.org> wrote: >> >>> >>> >>

Re: [blink-dev] Intent to Deprecate and Relaunch: CHIPS on WebView

On Wed, May 29, 2024 at 5:02 PM 'Dylan Cutler' via blink-dev < blink-dev@chromium.org> wrote: > Hello Blink API Owners, > > > We’re seeking approval to unship and relaunch CHIPS (a.k.a. partitioned > cookies) in Android WebView only. > > Rationale > > The WebViewClient supports a method, shouldInt

Re: [blink-dev] Re: Intent to Deprecate and Remove: 0.0.0.0 for Private Network Access

On Mon, Jun 3, 2024 at 12:06 PM 'David Adrian' via blink-dev < blink-dev@chromium.org> wrote: > Chrome Status doesn't generate emails for the deprecation trails, only > developer trials, so I've repurposed that here. This is a Finch managed > rollout, not a developer opt-in, due to the extremely l

Re: [blink-dev] Intent to Deprecate and Relaunch: CHIPS on WebView

'd like to leave it as a last resort. > > Let me know what you think, and if this sounds acceptable, I can get that > data from UMA to start to inform if we want to pursue the algorithm in (2). > > Thanks, > Dylan > > On Fri, May 31, 2024 at 5:11 AM Vladimir Levin >

Re: [blink-dev] Re: Intent to Ship: No-Vary-Search support for prerender

LGTM3 On Thu, Jun 6, 2024 at 12:45 PM Chris Harrelson wrote: > LGTM2 > > On Wed, Jun 5, 2024 at 9:56 PM Mike Taylor wrote: > >> LGTM1 - I'm very happy to see this ship. >> On 6/6/24 11:42 AM, Domenic Denicola wrote: >> >> I will abstain from approving this feature as an API Owner, as one of the

Re: [blink-dev] Intent to Ship: No-Vary-Search Hint for Prerender Speculation Rules

>From the explainer, expects_no_vary_search helps because when we're prefetching but have not yet received headers, we don't know if that request would match what the user is now navigating to. Do you have a sense of how often the failure cases happen? (ie we waited for that navigation request to f

Re: [blink-dev] Intent to Ship: No-Vary-Search Hint for Prerender Speculation Rules

ity with navigation to a URL that exactly matches an > in-progress prefetch URL > > The above discussion about No-Vary-Search hint applies to prerender as > well. > > On Thursday, June 6, 2024 at 1:26:34 PM UTC-4 Vladimir Levin wrote: > >> From the explainer, expects_no_va

Re: [blink-dev] Intent to Ship: No-Vary-Search Hint for Prerender Speculation Rules

le default in the absence of the hint. > That makes sense. It seems like the expectation is that this hint would only be used in cases where developers are optimizing on hover to save as much time as possible, so it makes sense that racing or having wasted work is undesired. LGTM3 Thanks, Vlad

Re: [blink-dev] Intent to Ship: CSS ruby-align property

LGTM3 On Thu, Jun 6, 2024 at 9:28 PM Mike Taylor wrote: > LGTM2 > On 6/7/24 1:39 AM, Chris Harrelson wrote: > > Sorry, make that "LGTM1" > > On Thu, Jun 6, 2024 at 9:39 AM chrishtr via Chromestatus < > admin+chris...@cr-status.appspotmail.com> wrote: > >> LGTM >> -- >> You received this message

Re: [blink-dev] Intent to Ship: Protected Audience - Fix implementation and spec for renderSize

Hi, Can you please start the various reviews in chromestatus? [image: chipsna.png] Thanks, Vlad On Fri, Jun 7, 2024 at 11:10 AM 'Xiaochen Zhou' via blink-dev < blink-dev@chromium.org> wrote: > Contact emails > > xiaoche...@google.com, shivani...@google.com, jkar...@google.com > > Explainer > >

Re: [blink-dev] Intent to Ship: Protected Audience: Allow trusted bidding signals to trigger interest group updates

I think this is an improvement to the platform. My only small (bikeshed) concern is the name of the variable: updateIfOlderThanMs. Instead of a day, it seems that we're going down to millisecond level. The spec also says > An `updateIfOlderThanMs` that's less than 10 minutes will be clamped to 10 m

Re: [blink-dev] Intent to Ship: Protected Audience: Allow trusted bidding signals to trigger interest group updates

11, 2024 at 11:46:09 AM UTC-4 Vladimir Levin wrote: > >> I think this is an improvement to the platform. My only small (bikeshed) >> concern is the name of the variable: updateIfOlderThanMs. Instead of a day, >> it seems that we're going down to millisecond level. The s

Re: [blink-dev] Re: Intent to Ship: SkipAd media session action

LGTM2 On Tue, Jun 11, 2024 at 3:42 AM Yoav Weiss (@Shopify) < yoavwe...@chromium.org> wrote: > LGTM1 > > On Tue, Jun 11, 2024 at 12:14 AM 'Jiaming Cheng' via blink-dev < > blink-dev@chromium.org> wrote: > >> Thanks François for the info! >> >> Hi Philip, please let us know if you have any other q

Re: [blink-dev] Intent to Ship: WebAuthn hints

Hi, Is it possible to put together a small explainer for this. It's a bit difficult to understand what this hint would control. Do you have examples? Thanks, Vlad On Wednesday, June 5, 2024 at 1:11:27 PM UTC-4 Adam Langley wrote: > On Tue, Jun 4, 2024 at 7:26 PM Mike Taylor wrote: > >> Review

Re: [blink-dev] Intent to Implement and Ship: aria-rowindextext and aria-colindextext

LGTM1, thanks On Wed, Jun 12, 2024 at 2:35 PM 'Daniel Clark' via blink-dev < blink-dev@chromium.org> wrote: > *Contact emails* > > dan...@microsoft.com > > > > *Explainer* > > No formal explainer but https://github.com/w3c/aria/issues/667 discusses > use cases and alternatives. > > > > *Specifica

Re: [blink-dev] Re: Intent to Prototype and Ship: Compute Pressure WebDriver endpoints

LGTM2 On Mon, Jun 24, 2024 at 3:05 PM Mike Taylor wrote: > Thanks - LGTM1 > > On 6/24/24 11:02 AM, Raphael Kubo da Costa wrote: > > Done! > > > > Mike Taylor writes: > >> Could you please request reviews for the various review gate bits in > >> your chromestatus entry? > >> > >> > >> (privacy,

Re: [blink-dev] Intent to Prototype and Ship: Standardized CSS zoom

On Mon, Jun 24, 2024 at 5:54 PM Stefan Zager wrote: > Hey all, > > I recently took over ownership of this project, and I have a couple of > updates... > > - The target launch milestone is now M128. > > - In addition to the changes in functionality previously discussed, we are > going to ship a ne

Re: [blink-dev] Intent to Prototype and Ship: Standardized CSS zoom

On Tue, Jun 25, 2024 at 4:27 PM Stefan Zager wrote: > On Tue, Jun 25, 2024 at 8:26 AM Vladimir Levin > wrote: > >> >> >> On Mon, Jun 24, 2024 at 5:54 PM Stefan Zager wrote: >> >>> Hey all, >>> >>> I recently took over o

Re: [blink-dev] Intent to Deprecate and Relaunch: CHIPS on WebView

w frequently cookie manager is used in these cases? I'm trying to estimate actual inconsistent behavior that this is trying to fix and if that worth the risk of breakage for all partitioned cookies Also, what's the timeline for shipping the cookie manager fix that would be able to deal

Re: [blink-dev] Intent to Deprecate and Remove: Deprecation of CSS Anchor Positioning property `inset-area`

On Wed, Jul 10, 2024 at 6:10 PM 'Ajay Rahatekar' via blink-dev < blink-dev@chromium.org> wrote: > Contact emailsmas...@chromium.org > > ExplainerNone > > Specification > https://github.com/w3c/csswg-drafts/issues/10209#issuecomment-2221005001 > > Summary > > The CSSWG resolved to rename the `inset

Re: [blink-dev] Intent to Deprecate and Remove: Deprecation of CSS Anchor Positioning property `inset-area`

On Thu, Jul 11, 2024 at 11:52 AM Mason Freed wrote: > > > On Thu, Jul 11, 2024 at 8:31 AM Vladimir Levin > wrote: > >> From the other emails, there is a 0.02% usage of this property right now, >> so it may be worthwhile to document the planned timeline for the &g

Re: [blink-dev] Intent to Ship: Rename inset-area to position-area

Just to clarify: this intent is to add `position-area` which is a drop in replacement/alias for `inset-area`. The latter is being deprecated via another intent. Is this correct? Thanks, Vlad On Wed, Jul 10, 2024 at 6:23 PM Mason Freed wrote: > {NOTE: this is a replacement of this chromestatus >

Re: [blink-dev] Intent to Ship: Rename inset-area to position-area

LGTM1 to add `position-area`, since it is an alias for `inset-area` that is shipped and is being deprecated. On Thu, Jul 11, 2024 at 12:22 PM Mason Freed wrote: > > On Thu, Jul 11, 2024 at 9:17 AM Vladimir Levin > wrote: > >> Just to clarify: this intent is to add `positio

Re: [blink-dev] Intent to Extend Experiment: Capture all screens

; >>>>> >>>>> On Tuesday, June 25, 2024 at 7:48:07 PM UTC+2 Daniel Bratell wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> Any reason to not make it available for everyone? Asking for a friend. >>>>>> >>>>>> Another thing, when e

Re: [blink-dev] Intent to Deprecate and Relaunch: CHIPS on WebView

Thu, Jul 11, 2024 at 1:17 PM Torne (Richard Coles) wrote: > > > On Tue, 9 Jul 2024 at 10:20, Vladimir Levin wrote: > >> >> >> On Fri, Jun 28, 2024, 16:28 'Dylan Cutler' via blink-dev < >> blink-dev@chromium.org> wrote: >> >>> Hey Vl

Re: [blink-dev] Intent to Extend Experiment: Capture all screens

to and including M131. If more time is needed, you can come back for another extension with evidence of substantial progress (e.g. shipping the feature on top of IWA). Thanks, Vlad > > On Wednesday, July 17, 2024 at 6:45:44 PM UTC+2 Daniel Bratell wrote: > >> LGTM2 >> >

Re: [blink-dev] Intent to Ship: Rename position-try-options to position-try-fallbacks

On Wed, Jul 10, 2024 at 6:34 PM Mason Freed wrote: > {NOTE: this is a replacement of this chromestatus > , which has the wrong > feature type and cannot be changed.} > Contact emailsmas...@chromium.org, andr...@chromium.org > > ExplainerNone > >

Re: [blink-dev] Intent to Ship: WebGPU extended range (HDR) support

LGTM2 On Wed, Jul 17, 2024 at 10:09 PM Domenic Denicola wrote: > > > On Wednesday, July 17, 2024 at 10:41:26 AM UTC+9 Domenic Denicola wrote: > > This looks like a nice straightforward feature. Just one potential spec > issue... > > On Tue, Jul 16, 2024 at 11:19 PM 'Christopher Cameron' via blin

Re: [blink-dev] Intent to Deprecate and Relaunch: CHIPS on WebView

es being deleted. LGTM1 > Also, could you start the various reviews on the chromestatus entry? > > Done! > > Dylan > > On Wed, Jul 17, 2024 at 2:03 PM Vladimir Levin > wrote: > >> Thank you for all of the context. >> >> I agree that deleting the

Re: [blink-dev] Intent to Extend Experiment: Capture all screens

un-LGTM that initial intent, >>> and >>> should have resulted in the original OT never landing. That would have >>> avoided the mess we're in now. >>>- Multiple milestones where the OT ran without any public approval >>>from th

Re: [blink-dev] Intent to Ship: Coalesce selectionchange events

On Tue, Jul 23, 2024 at 3:08 AM Shuangshuang Zhou < shuangshuang.z...@intel.com> wrote: > Contact emailsshuangshuang.z...@intel.com > > ExplainerNone > > Specification > https://w3c.github.io/selection-api/#scheduling-selectionhange-event > > Summary > > This feature is not to fire selectionchange

Re: [blink-dev] Intent to Ship: Isolated Web Apps

My understanding is that IWAs would have to be signed by some entity before they can run (Google?). I was wondering if you had thoughts about a path forward if other browsers also support IWAs or if other companies want to sign and accept those bundles. Essentially, would it become a somewhat frag

Re: [blink-dev] Intent to Ship: Isolated Web Apps

alized yet, and we don't have an > ETA on when it would ship. > Ok, thank you for the explanation. LGTM3 > > On Thursday, August 1, 2024 at 8:40:48 AM UTC-7 Vladimir Levin wrote: > >> My understanding is that IWAs would have to be signed by some entity >> before t

Re: [blink-dev] Intent to Implement & Ship: Transferable RTCDataChannel to dedicated workers

Can this API be feature detected? IOW, do developers have an easy way to figure if RTCDataChannel can be transferred? Thanks, Vlad On Wed, Aug 14, 2024 at 11:47 AM Daniel Bratell wrote: > LGTM1 > > /Daniel > On 2024-08-09 01:21, Thomas Guilbert wrote: > > Contact emails tguilb...@chromium.org >

Re: [blink-dev] Intent to Ship: Intl.DurationFormat

LGTM3 On Tue, Aug 13, 2024 at 11:56 AM Daniel Bratell wrote: > LGTM2 > > /Daniel > On 2024-08-13 08:51, Domenic Denicola wrote: > > It looks like you have requested all the reviews and closed all the issues > I pointed out. LGTM1! > > On Wednesday, August 7, 2024 at 9:20:26 AM UTC+9 Domenic Deni

Re: [blink-dev] Intent to Implement & Ship: Transferable RTCDataChannel to dedicated workers

LGTM3 On Thu, Aug 15, 2024 at 12:11 AM Domenic Denicola wrote: > LGTM2. > > On Fri, Aug 9, 2024 at 8:22 AM Thomas Guilbert > wrote: > >> Contact emailstguilb...@chromium.org >> >> ExplainerNone >> >> Specification >> https://w3c.github.io/webrtc-extensions/#rtcdatachannel-transferable >> > > Th

Re: [blink-dev] Intent to Ship: Private Aggregation API: client-side contribution merging

This looks like a fairly minor improvement to the API. It seems like the change would allow more contributions without increasing performance concerns. Please let me know if there are any subtleties that I may have missed. LGTM1 Thanks, Vlad On Fri, Aug 16, 2024 at 5:50 PM Alex Turner wrote: >

Re: [blink-dev] Re: Intent to Ship: Web Serial: connected attribute and RFCOMM connection events

On Wed, Aug 28, 2024 at 12:34 PM 'Ajay Rahatekar' via blink-dev < blink-dev@chromium.org> wrote: > Ty, Will do. > > On Wednesday, August 28, 2024 at 9:02:31 AM UTC-7 sligh...@chromium.org > wrote: > >> Please send this as an FYI to the TAG. >> >> LGTM1 >> >> On Friday, August 23, 2024 at 10:05:35 

Re: [blink-dev] Re: Intent to Ship: Web Serial: connected attribute and RFCOMM connection events

On Wed, Aug 28, 2024 at 2:38 PM Reilly Grant wrote: > On Wed, Aug 28, 2024 at 11:22 AM Vladimir Levin > wrote: > >> >> On Wed, Aug 28, 2024 at 12:34 PM 'Ajay Rahatekar' via blink-dev < >> blink-dev@chromium.org> wrote: >> >>> Ty, Will d

Re: [blink-dev] Re: Intent to Ship: HTTPS pages with Cache-control: no-store and Back/Forward Cache

This is potentially a naive question, since I'm not familiar with all of the CC headers, but how would the following situation work (or rather how is this meant to work?): I have an "overview" page that lists some items that come from a database. This page has an input box with a button to add a n

Re: [blink-dev] Re: Intent to Ship: HTTPS pages with Cache-control: no-store and Back/Forward Cache

On Mon, Sep 11, 2023 at 8:46 AM 'Fergal Daly' via blink-dev < blink-dev@chromium.org> wrote: > > > On Fri, 8 Sept 2023 at 02:21, Vladimir Levin wrote: > >> This is potentially a naive question, since I'm not familiar with all of >> the CC headers, b

Re: [blink-dev] Re: Intent to Ship: HTTPS pages with Cache-control: no-store and Back/Forward Cache

he page just randomly changed over the timeout's period, which are > not scary) > > On Mon, Sep 11, 2023 at 12:32 PM Vladimir Levin > wrote: > >> >> >> On Mon, Sep 11, 2023 at 8:46 AM 'Fergal Daly' via blink-dev < >> blink-dev@chromium.org>

Re: [blink-dev] Re: Intent to Ship: HTTPS pages with Cache-control: no-store and Back/Forward Cache

Are there any spec changes planned for this feature? I'm not sure if the README linked under Specification is meant to make it into WHATWG, maybe to close out https://github.com/whatwg/html/issues/7189 The only spec I could find about CCNS is https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc9111#section-5.2.1.5,

[blink-dev] Intent to Prototype: View Transitions: transition types

Contact emailsvmp...@chromium.org, nrosent...@chromium.org Specification https://drafts.csswg.org/css-view-transitions-2/#the-active-view-transition-pseudo Summary This feature allows View transition API use to be customized for different types of transitions. Specifically, this adds an ability

Re: [blink-dev] Re: Intent to Ship: HTTPS pages with Cache-control: no-store and Back/Forward Cache

On Fri, Oct 13, 2023 at 12:00 AM 'Fergal Daly' via blink-dev < blink-dev@chromium.org> wrote: > On Thu, 12 Oct 2023 at 23:05, Yoav Weiss wrote: > >> >> >> On Thu, Oct 12, 2023 at 3:56 PM Vladimir Levin >> wrote: >> >>> Are there a

[blink-dev] Web-Facing Change PSA: View Transitions: making callback non-nullable

Contact emailsvmp...@chromium.org Specification https://drafts.csswg.org/css-view-transitions-1/#additions-to-document-api Summary The `startViewTransition` call currently takes an optional nullable callback type with a default value of null: `startViewTransition(optional UpdateCallback? callbac

[blink-dev] Intent to Prototype: checkVisibility: contentVisibilityAuto, opacityProperty, and visibilityProperty

Contact emailsvmp...@chromium.org Specification https://drafts.csswg.org/cssom-view/#dom-element-checkvisibility Summary This feature adds three more values to the checkVisibility ( https://drafts.csswg.org/cssom-view/#dom-element-checkvisibility) dictionary members: * opacityProperty as an alia

[blink-dev] Intent to Ship: checkVisibility: contentVisibilityAuto, opacityProperty, and visibilityProperty

Contact emailsvmp...@chromium.org ExplainerNone Specification https://drafts.csswg.org/cssom-view/#dom-element-checkvisibility Summary This feature adds three more values to the checkVisibility ( https://drafts.csswg.org/cssom-view/#dom-element-checkvisibility) dictionary members: * opacityProp

[blink-dev] Intent to Ship: View Transitions: transition types

Contact emailsvmp...@chromium.org, nrosent...@chromium.org Explainer https://github.com/vmpstr/web-proposals/blob/main/explainers/view-transition-types.md Specification https://drafts.csswg.org/css-view-transitions-2/#the-active-view-transition-pseudo Summary This feature allows View transition

Re: [blink-dev] Intent to Ship: View Transitions: transition types

On Thu, Nov 9, 2023, 12:54 Mike Taylor wrote: > On 11/8/23 3:53 PM, Vladimir Levin wrote: > > Contact emails vmp...@chromium.org, nrosent...@chromium.org > > Explainer > https://github.com/vmpstr/web-proposals/blob/main/explainers/view-transition-types.md > &g

Re: [blink-dev] Re: Intent to Ship: HTTPS pages with Cache-control: no-store and Back/Forward Cache

chromium.org/p/chromium/issues/detail?id=1468438> further >>>> reduce the risk such that we believe it is unlikely that this will lead to >>>> new security issues. >>>> >>>> On Friday, October 13, 2023 at 7:14:46 AM UTC-7 vmp...@chromium.org >>>>

Re: [blink-dev] Re: Intent to Ship: HTTPS pages with Cache-control: no-store and Back/Forward Cache

iously rolling out this change. Thanks everyone, > > F > > On Thu, 16 Nov 2023 at 13:37, Fergal Daly wrote: > >> Thanks everyone. Yes we will keep this thread up to date before releasing >> this (we'll go to canary/dev very soon so that we start getting stabil

Re: [blink-dev] Re: Intent to Ship: HTTPS pages with Cache-control: no-store and Back/Forward Cache

On Wed, Dec 6, 2023 at 1:16 AM 'Fergal Daly' via blink-dev < blink-dev@chromium.org> wrote: > > > On Wed, 6 Dec 2023 at 13:55, Fergal Daly wrote: > >> On Wed, 6 Dec 2023 at 12:29, Vladimir Levin wrote: >> >>> Thank you for the update! >&g

[blink-dev] Intent to Prototype: CSS view-transition-class and class VT argument syntax

Contact emailsvmp...@chromium.org, nrosent...@chromium.org Explainer https://github.com/vmpstr/web-proposals/blob/main/explainers/view-transition-classes.md Specificationhttps://drafts.csswg.org/css-view-transitions-2 Summary This feature introduces a new CSS property view-transition-class whic

Re: [blink-dev] Intent to Ship: ServiceWorker static routing API

On Thu, Feb 8, 2024, 22:56 Yoshisato Yanagisawa wrote: > Contact emails > > yyanagis...@chromium.org, sisidov...@chromium.org > > Explainer > > https://github.com/WICG/service-worker-static-routing-api > > Specification > > https://github.com/w3c/ServiceWorker/pull/1701 > > Summary > > This API a

Re: [blink-dev] Intent to Ship: Remove "window-placement" alias for permission and permission policy "window-management"

On Mon, Feb 19, 2024 at 12:10 PM Yoav Weiss (@Shopify) < yoavwe...@chromium.org> wrote: > > > On Fri, Feb 16, 2024 at 8:19 PM Brad Triebwasser > wrote: > >> Usage for the legacy permission and permission policy are ~0.006 >> and

Re: [blink-dev] Intent to Ship: Sec-CH-UA-Form-Factor client hint

On Tue, Feb 20, 2024 at 7:06 AM 'Dustin Mitchell' via blink-dev < blink-dev@chromium.org> wrote: > Contact emailsdjmit...@chromium.org > > Explainer > https://github.com/djmitche/web-explainers/blob/main/sec-ch-ua-form-factor.md > > Specificationhttps://wicg.github.io/ua-client-hints/#sec-ch-ua-fo

Re: [blink-dev] Intent to Ship: Sec-CH-UA-Form-Factor client hint

On Wed, Feb 21, 2024 at 11:25 AM Dustin Mitchell wrote: > Thanks for the comments! > > On Tue, Feb 20, 2024 at 11:10 AM Vladimir Levin > wrote: > >> >> >> On Tue, Feb 20, 2024 at 7:06 AM 'Dustin Mitchell' via blink-dev < >> blink

[blink-dev] Intent to Ship: Document Render-Blocking

Contact emailsvmp...@chromium.org, nrosent...@chromium.org Explainer https://github.com/WICG/view-transitions/blob/main/document-render-blocking.md#blocking-element-id Specification https://html.spec.whatwg.org/multipage/links.html#link-type-expect Summary This feature enables authors to block

[blink-dev] Re: Intent to Ship: Document Render-Blocking

Re failing tests: The flag is currently in "test" status which I don't believe would be picked up by wpt.fyi experimental

[blink-dev] Intent to Prototype and Ship: content-visibility: auto implies contain-intrinsic-size: auto

Contact emailsvmp...@chromium.org Specificationhttps://drafts.csswg.org/css-sizing-4/#intrinsic-size-override Summary This feature is a result of a CSSWG resolution: https://github.com/w3c/csswg-drafts/issues/8407#issuecomment-1440466558 content-visibility: auto is a property that can be used to

  1   2   >