Thanks Danil. Great, that means you can mark 'Firefox' as 'shipping' in chromestatus. For Safari ideally you'd link to a WebKit bug tracking this, but regardless (even if they say something positive) the signal stays <https://docs.google.com/document/d/1xkHRXnFS8GDqZi7E0SSbR3a7CZsGScdxPUWBsNgo-oo/edit#heading=h.tgzhprxcmw4u> as "no signal" (unless they too are shipping or have an official standards position entry - which seems like overkill here).
Rick On Tue, Jan 24, 2023 at 1:59 PM Daniil Sakhapov <[email protected]> wrote: > Now I see, thanks! > > Firefox has updated their implementation and is up-to-date. > Safari hasn't done anything yet from what I can tell. I will ping them. > > Long live the web platform! > > On Tue, Jan 24, 2023 at 7:00 PM Rick Byers <[email protected]> wrote: > >> Sorry I wasn't clear. I mean that WebKit and Gecko have implementations >> of container queries, do they already support these properties? If not, we >> want to ensure they're aware of the spec change and have open bugs tracking >> making updates to their engines to reduce the likely time period for >> inconsistent behavior between browsers especially since there's some web >> compat risk around conditionText. >> >> In general we're looking for signals from the other engines. This is what >> the Safari and Firefox signals portion of the status entry >> <https://chromestatus.com/feature/5159369837117440> are for, but yours >> are both blank. In this case it's a tiny change approved by the CSSWG so >> I'm not too worried (hence my LGTM without blocking), but the principle of >> evolving the web together with the other engines still applies. >> >> Thanks, >> Rick >> >> On Tue, Jan 24, 2023 at 12:31 PM Daniil Sakhapov <[email protected]> >> wrote: >> >>> Hi, Rick! >>> >>> Thanks! Not sure I understand what you mean. >>> >>> On Tue, Jan 24, 2023 at 6:21 PM Rick Byers <[email protected]> wrote: >>> >>>> Looks to be a very low risk update to a brand new feature, LGTM3 >>>> >>>> But what do we know about the other implementations with respect to >>>> this change? For any which haven't yet updated, are there bugs tracking it? >>>> >>>> On Tue, Jan 24, 2023 at 10:27 AM Mike Taylor <[email protected]> >>>> wrote: >>>> >>>>> LGTM2 >>>>> >>>>> On 1/24/23 9:19 AM, Philip Jägenstedt wrote: >>>>> >>>>> LGTM1 >>>>> >>>>> Thanks Daniil for that httparchive analysis. The second one looking >>>>> for use of the @container rule should include all cases that could matter. >>>>> 56 unique matches is a very small number when it comes to httparchive >>>>> compat analysis. I double checked just one of them (botaniska.se, a >>>>> nice park in Gothenburg!) and indeed that usage doesn't even >>>>> involve CSSContainerRule. When we're unable to find even a single case >>>>> that >>>>> would break, that's as good as it gets for compat risk. >>>>> >>>>> Let's ship it before something starts to depend on the old behavior! >>>>> >>>>> On Tue, Jan 24, 2023 at 12:48 PM Daniil Sakhapov < >>>>> [email protected]> wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> And another query for @container + conditionText. There are no things >>>>>> that can be broken. >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1ILyBkGLud7fy4kXjlLURELhcMRAPqdEWz8X8J25SfDY/edit?usp=sharing >>>>>> >>>>>> On Mon, Jan 23, 2023 at 11:35 AM Daniil Sakhapov < >>>>>> [email protected]> wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>> Hi! >>>>>>> >>>>>>> So, I haven't found any usage on the websites chromestatus gave me. >>>>>>> But looking at WebArchive results >>>>>>> <https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1tSOlf8bN50vmduWvzttKfhqHaPYeIXbVqFe21fFY70s/edit?usp=sharing_eil_m&ts=63ce61e6> >>>>>>> I >>>>>>> can see that the usage is very small and the update won't change >>>>>>> anything. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> On Wed, Jan 18, 2023 at 6:04 PM Alex Russell < >>>>>>> [email protected]> wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Hey Daniil: >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Thanks for filing for this change while the feature is still >>>>>>>> low-use; it'll be much more challenging to make this switch later. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Something that wasn't clear from the use counters you linked was >>>>>>>> the use of the IDL properties vs. the CSS names. Given that it seems >>>>>>>> like >>>>>>>> we have use-counters for the latter but not the former, it seems >>>>>>>> reasonable >>>>>>>> to consider CSS usage to be a hard cap on potential use of the JS >>>>>>>> interface. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Would you be willing to manually inspect some content (say 10-20 >>>>>>>> sites) that use the CSS `container-name` and `container-query` >>>>>>>> attributes >>>>>>>> to look for script access? Presumably it's a fraction that population, >>>>>>>> but >>>>>>>> verifying would be helpful. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Thanks >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> On Tuesday, January 17, 2023 at 8:31:42 AM UTC-8 Daniil Sakhapov >>>>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Contact emails [email protected] >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Specification >>>>>>>>> https://w3c.github.io/csswg-drafts/css-contain-3/#the-csscontainerrule-interface >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Summary >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Updates the CSSContainerRule interface to match the specs. >>>>>>>>> Implements containerName and containerQuery, updates conditionText for >>>>>>>>> @container to be up-to-date with specs. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Blink component Blink>CSS >>>>>>>>> <https://bugs.chromium.org/p/chromium/issues/list?q=component:Blink%3ECSS> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> TAG review https://github.com/w3ctag/design-reviews/issues/592 >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> TAG review status Issues addressed >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Risks >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Activation >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Previous conditionText attribute contained only container-query >>>>>>>>> part, but now it's both container-name and container-query. But it >>>>>>>>> should >>>>>>>>> not break a lot of sites due to low current usage as per: >>>>>>>>> https://chromestatus.com/metrics/css/timeline/popularity/697 >>>>>>>>> https://chromestatus.com/metrics/css/timeline/popularity/699 The >>>>>>>>> real breakage is hard to measure, as it's not possible to track the >>>>>>>>> how >>>>>>>>> result of conditionText is used and the usage of container-name is low >>>>>>>>> compared to the container-type usage. Also, conditionText is >>>>>>>>> readonly, so >>>>>>>>> there are no round-trip issues >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Will this feature be supported on all six Blink platforms >>>>>>>>> (Windows, Mac, Linux, Chrome OS, Android, and Android WebView)? >>>>>>>>> Yes >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Is this feature fully tested by web-platform-tests >>>>>>>>> <https://chromium.googlesource.com/chromium/src/+/main/docs/testing/web_platform_tests.md> >>>>>>>>> ? Yes >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> https://wpt.fyi/css/css-contain/container-queries/at-container-style-serialization.html >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> https://wpt.fyi/css/css-contain/container-queries/at-container-serialization.html >>>>>>>>> https://wpt.fyi/css/css-contain/container-queries/idlharness.html >>>>>>>>> https://wpt.fyi/css/cssom/CSSContainerRule.tentative.html >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Requires code in //chrome? False >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Tracking bug https://crbug.com/1393577 >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Estimated milestones >>>>>>>>> DevTrial on desktop 112 >>>>>>>>> DevTrial on Android 112 >>>>>>>>> Link to entry on the Chrome Platform Status >>>>>>>>> https://chromestatus.com/feature/5159369837117440 >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> This intent message was generated by Chrome Platform Status >>>>>>>>> <https://chromestatus.com/>. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> -- >>>>>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google >>>>>> Groups "blink-dev" group. >>>>>> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, >>>>>> send an email to [email protected]. >>>>>> To view this discussion on the web visit >>>>>> https://groups.google.com/a/chromium.org/d/msgid/blink-dev/CAH3Z92_u4JkFfr4KE-z_Xyt9x_T3Jks40xiEs5vNjcwBsurjjQ%40mail.gmail.com >>>>>> <https://groups.google.com/a/chromium.org/d/msgid/blink-dev/CAH3Z92_u4JkFfr4KE-z_Xyt9x_T3Jks40xiEs5vNjcwBsurjjQ%40mail.gmail.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer> >>>>>> . >>>>>> >>>>> -- >>>>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google >>>>> Groups "blink-dev" group. >>>>> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send >>>>> an email to [email protected]. >>>>> To view this discussion on the web visit >>>>> https://groups.google.com/a/chromium.org/d/msgid/blink-dev/CAARdPYeVAsLcvqfkch2ikF%2Bn-XY-J-NNeEvPs3aNfajtv%2B-uJw%40mail.gmail.com >>>>> <https://groups.google.com/a/chromium.org/d/msgid/blink-dev/CAARdPYeVAsLcvqfkch2ikF%2Bn-XY-J-NNeEvPs3aNfajtv%2B-uJw%40mail.gmail.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer> >>>>> . >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> -- >>>>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google >>>>> Groups "blink-dev" group. >>>>> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send >>>>> an email to [email protected]. >>>>> To view this discussion on the web visit >>>>> https://groups.google.com/a/chromium.org/d/msgid/blink-dev/383df41b-f40a-bad7-15e3-0fdddf51663e%40chromium.org >>>>> <https://groups.google.com/a/chromium.org/d/msgid/blink-dev/383df41b-f40a-bad7-15e3-0fdddf51663e%40chromium.org?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer> >>>>> . >>>>> >>>> -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "blink-dev" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/a/chromium.org/d/msgid/blink-dev/CAFUtAY-wvz_Uuw%2BOBuDKX4NzH7-KmLrCF1BsOEu7xGfJ%2BfkbRQ%40mail.gmail.com.
