On Mon, Jul 22, 2024 at 2:53 PM Mike Taylor <miketa...@chromium.org> wrote:
> Could you also request the Enterprise bit? > I missed flipping the bit after filling out the enterprise survey questions! Done. In the meantime - I'd love to know more about `[SecureContext=flag]` not > working - that capability was introduced to make these types of roll outs > safer, IIRC. In the past I've had to write postmortems because I thought > usage was low enough, but the breakage was in enterprise environments that > disable telemetry... and didn't have a finch flag to quickly revert. :( > > (I'm also not trying to send you on an impossible side-quest, but won't be > sad if someone is nerd sniped into fixing what feels like a regression). > Reached out to the team who might know about the change. > On 7/18/24 10:31 PM, Domenic Denicola wrote: > > LGTM1. It's a bit scary doing this without a Finch flag, but the usage is > very low and such pages are already broken in Firefox. > > On Fri, Jul 19, 2024 at 1:00 AM Mustaq Ahmed <mus...@chromium.org> wrote: > >> >> >> On Wed, Jul 17, 2024 at 2:20 PM Mike Taylor <miketa...@chromium.org> >> wrote: >> >>> On 7/17/24 10:18 AM, Mustaq Ahmed wrote: >>> >>> > Can you ask for WebKit's position? Or maye there's at least a pointer >>> to working group discussions they participated in? >>> >>> - Safari doesn't yet support PointerEvent.getCoalescedEvents(), so we >>> can't ask for their position on secure/non-secure context differences: >>> >>> https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Web/API/PointerEvent/getCoalescedEvents#browser_compatibility >>> >>> That's OK - we ask for positions from them all the time for things they >>> don't support. >>> >> >> Done: https://github.com/WebKit/standards-positions/issues/374 >> >>> - Here is a PEWG discussion started by @gsnedders from WebKit (I >>> couldn't find any other related discussion Safari participated in): >>> https://github.com/w3c/pointerevents/issues/215 >>> >>> To my knowledge, that was posted a few years before Sam started working >>> at Apple. >>> >> >> I missed this, sorry. My corrected answer is: "I couldn't find any PEWG >> discussion on Coalesced Events where Safari participated". >> >> > Our process requires a Finch feature in general. And this sort of >>> potentially-risky removal seems like the kind of thing that benefits from a >>> Finch feature, so that it can be remotely reverted if it causes terrible >>> regressions. >>> >>> Unfortunately we can't put this change behind a flag because Blink does >>> not allow making [SecureContext] conditional. I think it was supported >>> in the past because "Blink IDL Extended Attributes" documentation still >>> mentions [SecureContext=flag] as non-standard, but it doesn't even >>> compile! >>> >>> https://chromium.googlesource.com/chromium/src/+/HEAD/third_party/blink/renderer/bindings/IDLExtendedAttributes.md#securecontext >>> >>> >>> On Tue, Jul 16, 2024 at 9:30 PM Domenic Denicola <dome...@chromium.org> >>> wrote: >>> >>>> >>>> >>>> On Wed, Jul 17, 2024 at 6:52 AM Mustaq Ahmed <mus...@chromium.org> >>>> wrote: >>>> >>>>> Contact emails mus...@chromium.org >>>>> >>>>> Explainer None >>>>> >>>>> Specification >>>>> https://w3c.github.io/pointerevents/#pointerevent-interface >>>>> >>>>> Summary >>>>> >>>>> The Pointer Events Working Group made >>>>> PointerEvent.getCoalescedEvents() restricted to secure contexts 4+ years >>>>> ago, which removed the API from insecure contexts. Chrome originally >>>>> shipped the old behavior and didn't follow the spec change immediately >>>>> because of compat concerns. We are now removing it from insecure contexts >>>>> because Chrome usage in insecure contexts turned out to be very low. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Blink component Blink>Input >>>>> <https://bugs.chromium.org/p/chromium/issues/list?q=component:Blink%3EInput> >>>>> >>>>> TAG review None >>>>> >>>>> TAG review status Not applicable >>>>> >>>>> Risks >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Interoperability and Compatibility >>>>> >>>>> Interop: This will improves Interop, making Chrome fully match Firefox >>>>> (and the spec). Compat: There is a bit of risk because the usage is >>>>> non-zero (~0.0004% as of 2024-07-16). This usage stat is expected to >>>>> include non-breaking JS enumerations. >>>>> https://chromestatus.com/metrics/feature/timeline/popularity/4598 >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> *Gecko*: Shipped/Shipping >>>>> >>>>> *WebKit*: No signal >>>>> >>>> >>>> Can you ask for WebKit's position? Or maye there's at least a pointer >>>> to working group discussions they participated in? >>>> >>>> >>>>> >>>>> *Web developers*: No signals >>>>> >>>>> *Other signals*: >>>>> >>>>> WebView application risks >>>>> >>>>> Does this intent deprecate or change behavior of existing APIs, such >>>>> that it has potentially high risk for Android WebView-based applications? >>>>> >>>>> None >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Debuggability >>>>> >>>>> None >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Will this feature be supported on all six Blink platforms (Windows, >>>>> Mac, Linux, ChromeOS, 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/results/pointerevents?label=master&label=experimental&aligned&q=pointerevents%2Fpointerevent_constructor >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Flag name on chrome://flags None >>>>> >>>>> Finch feature name None >>>>> >>>>> Non-finch justification None >>>>> >>>> >>>> Our process requires a Finch feature in general. And this sort of >>>> potentially-risky removal seems like the kind of thing that benefits from a >>>> Finch feature, so that it can be remotely reverted if it causes terrible >>>> regressions. >>>> >>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Requires code in //chrome? False >>>>> >>>>> Tracking bug https://issues.chromium.org/40928769 >>>>> >>>>> Estimated milestones >>>>> Shipping on desktop 129 >>>>> Shipping on Android 129 >>>>> Shipping on WebView 129 >>>>> >>>>> Anticipated spec changes >>>>> >>>>> Open questions about a feature may be a source of future web compat or >>>>> interop issues. Please list open issues (e.g. links to known github issues >>>>> in the project for the feature specification) whose resolution may >>>>> introduce web compat/interop risk (e.g., changing to naming or structure >>>>> of >>>>> the API in a non-backward-compatible way). >>>>> None >>>>> >>>>> Link to entry on the Chrome Platform Status >>>>> https://chromestatus.com/feature/4941651093749760?gate=5095189648244736 >>>>> >>>>> 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 blink-dev+unsubscr...@chromium.org. >>>>> To view this discussion on the web visit >>>>> https://groups.google.com/a/chromium.org/d/msgid/blink-dev/CAB0cuO6UzHtEJdgeZGMChev-UbP0N5ts4AuJ9mKtr-aLWYbKWw%40mail.gmail.com >>>>> <https://groups.google.com/a/chromium.org/d/msgid/blink-dev/CAB0cuO6UzHtEJdgeZGMChev-UbP0N5ts4AuJ9mKtr-aLWYbKWw%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 blink-dev+unsubscr...@chromium.org. >>> To view this discussion on the web visit >>> https://groups.google.com/a/chromium.org/d/msgid/blink-dev/CAB0cuO4wETXcy7h%3D8S586WccqRj5jDX0_zaSJfvdtzyv3pU2Ew%40mail.gmail.com >>> <https://groups.google.com/a/chromium.org/d/msgid/blink-dev/CAB0cuO4wETXcy7h%3D8S586WccqRj5jDX0_zaSJfvdtzyv3pU2Ew%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 blink-dev+unsubscr...@chromium.org. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/a/chromium.org/d/msgid/blink-dev/CAB0cuO4XYB2TTtZ%3DaTGzJv1CaXa_%2BBOgc_N8o6M%2BvqPDvUNO%2Bg%40mail.gmail.com.
