LGTM1 to ship with a killswitch flag, just in case.

Thanks for the thorough analysis!

On Thu, Apr 20, 2023 at 3:41 PM Mathias Bynens <[email protected]> wrote:

> I’ve continued analyzing UKM results and have now reached n=40 as Rick
> suggested:
>
> | origin                                   | link to analysis
> | continues to work with the change? |
> | :--------------------------------------- | :----------------------------
> | :--------------------------------- |
> | https://account.amazon.jobs              | https://crbug.com/1412729#c23
> | ✅                                 |
> | https://code.earthengine.google.com      | https://crbug.com/1412729#c41
> | ✅                                 |
> | https://ekartlogistics.com               | https://crbug.com/1412729#c52
> | ✅                                 |
> | https://go.thepersonalfinancialguide.com | https://crbug.com/1412729#c29
> | ✅                                 |
> | https://heliyatra.irctc.co.in            | https://crbug.com/1412729#c47
> | ✅                                 |
> | https://identity.appen.com               | https://crbug.com/1412729#c11
> | ✅                                 |
> | https://login.vitalsource.com            | https://crbug.com/1412729#c17
> | ✅                                 |
> | https://login.yahoo.com                  | https://crbug.com/1412729#c16
> | ✅                                 |
> | https://m.betpix365.com                  | https://crbug.com/1412729#c27
> | ✅                                 |
> | https://m.esportesdasorte.com            | https://crbug.com/1412729#c21
> | ✅                                 |
> | https://m.estrelabet.com                 | https://crbug.com/1412729#c22
> | ✅                                 |
> | https://m.vaidebet.com                   | https://crbug.com/1412729#c32
> | ✅                                 |
> | https://my1.konami.net                   | https://crbug.com/1412729#c33
> | ✅                                 |
> | https://particuliers.engie.fr            | https://crbug.com/1412729#c34
> | ✅                                 |
> | https://register.betway.de               | https://crbug.com/1412729#c25
> | ✅                                 |
> | https://renegociacao.itau.com.br         | https://crbug.com/1412729#c51
> | ✅                                 |
> | https://signin.costco.com                | https://crbug.com/1412729#c12
> | ✅                                 |
> | https://smartkey.xertica.com             | https://crbug.com/1412729#c19
> | ✅                                 |
> | https://sports.coral.co.uk               | https://crbug.com/1412729#c35
> | ✅                                 |
> | https://sports.ladbrokes.com             | https://crbug.com/1412729#c31
> | ✅                                 |
> | https://tazkarti.com                     | https://crbug.com/1412729#c36
> | ✅                                 |
> | https://voterportal.eci.gov.in           | https://crbug.com/1412729#c53
> | ✅                                 |
> | https://www.acesso.gov.pt                | https://crbug.com/1412729#c26
> | ✅                                 |
> | https://www.air.irctc.co.in              | https://crbug.com/1412729#c37
> | ✅                                 |
> | https://www.bancoestado.cl               | https://crbug.com/1412729#c15
> | ✅                                 |
> | https://www.bienlinea.bi.com.gt          | https://crbug.com/1412729#c50
> | ✅                                 |
> | https://www.coachoutlet.com              | https://crbug.com/1412729#c49
> | ✅                                 |
> | https://www.enterprise.de                | https://crbug.com/1412729#c40
> | ✅                                 |
> | https://www.etopaz.az                    | https://crbug.com/1412729#c44
> | ✅                                 |
> | https://www.gamestop.com                 | https://crbug.com/1412729#c38
> | ✅                                 |
> | https://www.iliad.it                     | https://crbug.com/1412729#c39
> | ✅                                 |
> | https://www.irctctourism.com             | https://crbug.com/1412729#c42
> | ✅                                 |
> | https://www.leroymerlin.fr               | https://crbug.com/1412729#c18
> | ✅                                 |
> | https://www.mediafire.com                | https://crbug.com/1412729#c20
> | ✅                                 |
> | https://www.midatacredito.com            | https://crbug.com/1412729#c43
> | ✅                                 |
> | https://www.milanuncios.com              | https://crbug.com/1412729#c30
> | ✅                                 |
> | https://www.portaleargo.it               | https://crbug.com/1412729#c14
> | ✅                                 |
> | https://www.readworks.org                | https://crbug.com/1412729#c48
> | ✅                                 |
> | https://www.saksfifthavenue.com          | https://crbug.com/1412729#c46
> | ✅                                 |
> | https://www.thebay.com                   | https://crbug.com/1412729#c45
> | ✅                                 |
>
> This is not quite a "random" sample, as I instead started with the most
> common sources of UseCounter hits and then went down the list. I looked at
> a total of 58 unique origins, but some of the sites failed to load for me,
> or the offending `pattern` was hidden behind a paywall or login that I
> couldn’t get past.
>
> WDYT?
>
> On Thu, Apr 20, 2023 at 1:09 PM Mathias Bynens <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>>
>>
>> On Wed, Apr 19, 2023 at 9:41 PM Philip Jägenstedt <[email protected]>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> I wonder if we can get enough confidence with less work than
>>> investigating 40 randomly chosen sites from UseCounter hits.
>>>
>>> This is a population proportion problem, and
>>> https://sample-size.net/confidence-interval-proportion/ is a useful
>>> tool. If you check 40 cases and find no breakage (N=40, x=0) that gives us
>>> 95% confidence that breakage is less than 7.2% of samples in this data set.
>>> If it's useful to check that much depends on the value of the use counter.
>>>
>>> Is https://chromestatus.com/metrics/feature/timeline/popularity/4463
>>> the right use counter, and has it reached stable yet? Why is marked as
>>> obsolete?
>>>
>>
>> Yes, that’s the correct use counter, and yes it’s in M112. It’s marked
>> “obsolete” on the site because we removed it from the source tree as part
>> of M113, and ChromeStatus uses the latest HEAD as the source of truth for
>> the UseCounter labels. The rationale for removing the code triggering this
>> UseCounter was that a full milestone cycle (M112) should be more than
>> enough data to make a decision in this particular case.
>>
>>
>>> For purposes of illustration, let's use 0.04% from earlier in the thread
>>> and say we want to be (95%) confident that real breakage is less than
>>> 0.01%. Then we just need to get below 25% in the linked tool, and checking
>>> 11 samples and finding nothing is enough to do this.
>>>
>>> On Wed, Apr 19, 2023 at 5:43 PM Mathias Bynens <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Thanks for the guidance, Rick. I’ve prepared a CL moving the flag to
>>>> status=experimental
>>>> <https://chromium-review.googlesource.com/c/chromium/src/+/4447958> and
>>>> I can commit to investigating 40 unique UseCounter hits and summarizing my
>>>> findings. Fingers crossed the trend of “no actual breakage detected”
>>>> continues. I’ll keep you posted.
>>>>
>>>> On Wed, Apr 19, 2023 at 5:26 PM Rick Byers <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Thanks for doing a thorough compat analysis of this Mathias. I can
>>>>> totally see this being one where all the examples we can find don't seem 
>>>>> to
>>>>> cause breakage in practice. I know it's a lot, but if we looked at 40
>>>>> random examples and found none of them to break, that would suggest an
>>>>> upper bound of <0.001% of pages impacted (probably much lower) and I'd be
>>>>> OK giving this a shot with a finch killswitch ready in case of reports of
>>>>> serious breakage. Does that sound reasonable to you?
>>>>>
>>>>> Also feel free to set your flag
>>>>> <https://source.chromium.org/chromium/chromium/src/+/main:third_party/blink/renderer/platform/runtime_enabled_features.json5;l=1912?q=HTMLPatternRegExpUnicodeSets%20file:.json5&ss=chromium>
>>>>> to status=experimental, that'll get us some additional usage coverage 
>>>>> (from
>>>>> the small population that runs with
>>>>> --enable-experimental-web-platform-features) and also signal that this is
>>>>> close to becoming shipping behavior.
>>>>>
>>>>> Rick
>>>>>
>>>>> On Mon, Apr 17, 2023 at 7:03 AM 'Mathias Bynens' via blink-dev <
>>>>> [email protected]> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> So far, none of the UseCounter hits I investigated constitute any
>>>>>> actual breakage. The vast majority of hits seem to be login forms backed 
>>>>>> by
>>>>>> server-side validation. I’ll keep looking though.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> In the meantime, this feature is now
>>>>>> <https://chromium-review.googlesource.com/c/chromium/src/+/4414859>
>>>>>> available behind the 
>>>>>> `--enable-blink-features=HTMLPatternRegExpUnicodeSets`
>>>>>> flag (disabled by default).
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On Wednesday, April 5, 2023 at 5:53:10 PM UTC+2 Mathias Bynens wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On Wed, Apr 5, 2023 at 5:23 PM Alex Russell <[email protected]>
>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> I don't understand why TAG review is not applicable for this intent.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Fair enough. I’ve filed a TAG review request here:
>>>>>>> https://github.com/w3ctag/design-reviews/issues/832 I’ll update the
>>>>>>> ChromeStatus entry to refer to it.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On Tuesday, April 4, 2023 at 5:21:16 AM UTC-7 [email protected]
>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Thanks to the UseCounter + UKM + M112 hitting Stable, more results
>>>>>>>>> are starting to come in. I’ll be collecting public examples of 
>>>>>>>>> potential
>>>>>>>>> incompatibilities here:
>>>>>>>>> https://bugs.chromium.org/p/chromium/issues/detail?id=1412729#c11
>>>>>>>>> So far 0 out of the 2 examples cause any actual breakage — fingers 
>>>>>>>>> crossed
>>>>>>>>> that trend continues.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> On Mon, Apr 3, 2023 at 10:26 AM Philip Jägenstedt <
>>>>>>>>> [email protected]> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> I took a look at https://github.com/whatwg/html/pull/7908 and it
>>>>>>>>>> looks like there's agreement to merge it, but it's waiting on this 
>>>>>>>>>> intent
>>>>>>>>>> to be approved. Normally we block in the other direction, but that's 
>>>>>>>>>> fine,
>>>>>>>>>> as long as the spec change is merged.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Looks like there's broad support for this change, and it's just a
>>>>>>>>>> question of the site compat risk. ~0.04% as an upper bound is quite 
>>>>>>>>>> high.
>>>>>>>>>> Can we wait until the use counter is in stable and look at a random 
>>>>>>>>>> set of
>>>>>>>>>> sites hitting the use counter to determine what the real-world 
>>>>>>>>>> breakage
>>>>>>>>>> looks like?
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> On Fri, Mar 31, 2023 at 5:07 PM 'Mathias Bynens' via blink-dev <
>>>>>>>>>> [email protected]> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> On Fri, Mar 31, 2023 at 4:35 PM Mike Taylor <[email protected]>
>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> Hey Mathias,
>>>>>>>>>>>> On 3/31/23 5:56 AM, Mathias Bynens wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> Contact emails
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> [email protected]
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> Specification
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> https://github.com/whatwg/html/pull/7908
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> Summary
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> The <input pattern> attribute allows developers to specify a
>>>>>>>>>>>> regular expression pattern against which the input’s values are 
>>>>>>>>>>>> checked for
>>>>>>>>>>>> validity.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> <label>
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>   Part number:
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>   <input pattern="[0-9][A-Z]{3}" name="part"
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>          title="A part number is a digit followed by three
>>>>>>>>>>>> uppercase letters.">
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> </label>
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> When the pattern attribute was first implemented, these
>>>>>>>>>>>> regular expressions were compiled without any RegExp flags. In 
>>>>>>>>>>>> 2014, the
>>>>>>>>>>>> HTML Standard changed this by implicitly enabling the u flag
>>>>>>>>>>>> for the pattern attribute, enabling better Unicode support 
>>>>>>>>>>>> (including
>>>>>>>>>>>> support for Unicode character properties like \p{Letter}). This
>>>>>>>>>>>> change shipped in Chrome 53.
>>>>>>>>>>>> <https://chromestatus.com/feature/4753420745441280>
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> Now, we’re taking this to the next level by enabling the new
>>>>>>>>>>>> RegExp v flag <https://v8.dev/features/regexp-v-flag> instead
>>>>>>>>>>>> of u, enabling the use of set notation, string literal syntax,
>>>>>>>>>>>> and Unicode properties of strings.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> (Context: The RegExp v flag is a JavaScript language feature
>>>>>>>>>>>> which previously went through the Blink Intents process and shipped
>>>>>>>>>>>> in Chrome 112
>>>>>>>>>>>> <https://chromestatus.com/feature/5144156542861312>. This new
>>>>>>>>>>>> ChromeStatus entry is specifically about integrating it with the 
>>>>>>>>>>>> HTML
>>>>>>>>>>>> pattern attribute.)
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> Blink component
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> Blink>Forms
>>>>>>>>>>>> <https://bugs.chromium.org/p/chromium/issues/list?q=component:Blink%3EForms>
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> Search tags
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> unicode <https://chromestatus.com/features#tags:unicode>,
>>>>>>>>>>>> regexp <https://chromestatus.com/features#tags:regexp>, pattern
>>>>>>>>>>>> <https://chromestatus.com/features#tags:pattern>, validation
>>>>>>>>>>>> <https://chromestatus.com/features#tags:validation>
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> TAG review
>>>>>>>>>>>> TAG review status
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> Not applicable
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> Risks
>>>>>>>>>>>> Interoperability and Compatibility
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> The spec patch at https://github.com/whatwg/html/pull/7908
>>>>>>>>>>>> lists the potentially breaking changes. Some patterns that 
>>>>>>>>>>>> previously would
>>>>>>>>>>>> compile, now throw an early error with the v flag —
>>>>>>>>>>>> specifically those with a character class including either an 
>>>>>>>>>>>> unescaped
>>>>>>>>>>>> special character or a double punctuator.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> We expect such patterns to be rare. To validate this assumption
>>>>>>>>>>>> we’ve added a UseCounter called
>>>>>>>>>>>> HTMLPatternRegExpUnicodeSetIncompatibilitiesWithUnicodeMode
>>>>>>>>>>>> <https://chromestatus.com/metrics/feature/popularity#HTMLPatternRegExpUnicodeSetIncompatibilitiesWithUnicodeMode>
>>>>>>>>>>>> in M112, which tracks patterns in any JavaScript u RegExps
>>>>>>>>>>>> generated via the HTML pattern attribute that would throw if
>>>>>>>>>>>> they were used with the v flag.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> Importantly, note that any throwing pattern gracefully degrades
>>>>>>>>>>>> — it simply behaves as if the pattern attribute wasn’t
>>>>>>>>>>>> present, resulting in inputElement.validity.valid === true for
>>>>>>>>>>>> any input value. Consequently, the only compatibility risk is that 
>>>>>>>>>>>> some
>>>>>>>>>>>> value/pattern combinations that would previously result in
>>>>>>>>>>>> inputElement.validity.valid being false now result in it being
>>>>>>>>>>>> true. Thus, for every UseCounter hit, it could still be that
>>>>>>>>>>>> there is no actual breakage — the UseCounter just gives us the
>>>>>>>>>>>> upper bound. The currently available data from Beta suggests
>>>>>>>>>>>> the UseCounter hits for 0.0393% of Chrome page loads.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> I'm somewhat curious to see how much that UseCounter will grow
>>>>>>>>>>>> (if at all) when 112 goes to stable next week...
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Me too, and FWIW I'd understand if you and the other API owners
>>>>>>>>>>> prefer to wait until there’s some data for Stable before responding 
>>>>>>>>>>> to this
>>>>>>>>>>> Intent.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> Do you have any concerns about certain inputs being sent to a
>>>>>>>>>>>> server that might not have any backend validation, that would 
>>>>>>>>>>>> previously be
>>>>>>>>>>>> prevented by the u-vintage validation?
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> That’s indeed the only scenario in which there would be
>>>>>>>>>>> breakage. So far we haven’t heard of such cases in the wild. 
>>>>>>>>>>> (Arguably,
>>>>>>>>>>> such web pages are already broken, since DevTools could easily be 
>>>>>>>>>>> used to
>>>>>>>>>>> remove the `pattern` attribute, or requests could be made with 
>>>>>>>>>>> tools like
>>>>>>>>>>> `curl`.) FWIW, there was a similar discussion in this old blink-dev 
>>>>>>>>>>> thread:
>>>>>>>>>>> https://groups.google.com/a/chromium.org/g/blink-dev/c/XUNMtri0tI4/m/mjPkwXKNAQAJ
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> I forgot to mention that we explicitly added a console warning
>>>>>>>>>>> in M112 for any `pattern` attribute values that would be affected 
>>>>>>>>>>> by this
>>>>>>>>>>> change, to help developers prepare for the potential change. One 
>>>>>>>>>>> developer
>>>>>>>>>>> reported seeing the warning and adjusting their `pattern` attribute 
>>>>>>>>>>> values
>>>>>>>>>>> accordingly, but it’s unclear whether inaction would have really 
>>>>>>>>>>> broken
>>>>>>>>>>> their web page:
>>>>>>>>>>> https://bugs.chromium.org/p/chromium/issues/detail?id=1412729#c7
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> Gecko: Positive (Mozilla standards position request
>>>>>>>>>>>> <https://github.com/mozilla/standards-positions/issues/745>, 
>>>>>>>>>>>> implementation
>>>>>>>>>>>> tracking issue
>>>>>>>>>>>> <https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=pattern-v>)
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> WebKit: Positive (WebKit standards position request
>>>>>>>>>>>> <https://github.com/WebKit/standards-positions/issues/132>, 
>>>>>>>>>>>> implementation
>>>>>>>>>>>> tracking issue
>>>>>>>>>>>> <https://bugs.webkit.org/show_bug.cgi?id=pattern-v>)
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> Web developers: No signals
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> Other signals:
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> Debuggability
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> The pattern attribute is already well-supported in DevTools
>>>>>>>>>>>> and other tooling; no changes are necessary.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> 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>
>>>>>>>>>>>> ?
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> Pull Request:
>>>>>>>>>>>> https://github.com/web-platform-tests/wpt/pull/38547
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> Flag name
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> N/A
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> Requires code in //chrome?
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> False
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> Tracking bug
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> https://bugs.chromium.org/p/chromium/issues/detail?id=1412729
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> Sample links
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> https://mathiasbynens.be/demo/pattern-u-vs-v
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> Estimated milestones
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> M114
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> Link to entry on the Chrome Platform Status
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> https://chromestatus.com/feature/5149507107422208
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>>>>>>> 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/CADizRgaAq4FwzJbUqLQVo%2BQdd_V0PT7rBr510OGe8fenHA%3D3HQ%40mail.gmail.com
>>>>>>>>>>>> <https://groups.google.com/a/chromium.org/d/msgid/blink-dev/CADizRgaAq4FwzJbUqLQVo%2BQdd_V0PT7rBr510OGe8fenHA%3D3HQ%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/c9571b2a-a35b-3824-0f37-c93a9bb522fc%40chromium.org
>>>>>>>>>>>> <https://groups.google.com/a/chromium.org/d/msgid/blink-dev/c9571b2a-a35b-3824-0f37-c93a9bb522fc%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/CADizRgYxU2v2ANQgzNiLD%2B4P-qJHxzTYJfRDsKNCtY0Yb_0bdg%40mail.gmail.com
>>>>>>>>>>> <https://groups.google.com/a/chromium.org/d/msgid/blink-dev/CADizRgYxU2v2ANQgzNiLD%2B4P-qJHxzTYJfRDsKNCtY0Yb_0bdg%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/bf73fe5b-fde2-42df-90f0-582a905d1948n%40chromium.org
>>>>>> <https://groups.google.com/a/chromium.org/d/msgid/blink-dev/bf73fe5b-fde2-42df-90f0-582a905d1948n%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/CAL5BFfXauw04c2CtThKhnAgUw%3DkXm5deitGPXNN7vwSZzPXZdg%40mail.gmail.com.

Reply via email to