Hi All, I just wanted to flag that we have also updated the example with diagrams that better show a comparison of the behavior before vs. after using this feature: https://github.com/WICG/attribution-reporting-api/blob/main/attribution_scopes.md#attribution-scope-examples
Thanks, Akash On Friday, September 27, 2024 at 11:00:09 AM UTC-7 Akash Nadan wrote: > Hi Alex, > > We have updated the code in that example to now show a comparison of the > behavior before vs. after using this feature: > > https://github.com/WICG/attribution-reporting-api/blob/main/attribution_scopes.md#example-1-distinct-attribution-scopes-comparison-with-attribution-filters > > <https://github.com/WICG/attribution-reporting-api/blob/main/attribution_scopes.md#example-1-distinct-attribution-scopes-comparison-with-attribution-filters> > > Let me know if you have any follow up questions on the example. > > Thanks, > Akash > > On Thursday, September 26, 2024 at 1:56:03 PM UTC-7 Alex Russell wrote: > >> Hey Akash, >> >> That example was the one I was referring to when asking for more. This >> doesn't show a full in-situ example of how to use this or what code would >> have been necessary before (or what the "before" code's deficiencies were). >> >> Best, >> >> Alex >> >> On Thu, Sep 26, 2024 at 11:07 AM Akash Nadan <akash...@google.com> wrote: >> >>> Hi Alex, >>> >>> We have the following end-to-end example in the explainer that shows how >>> this would work for a more real example: >>> https://github.com/WICG/attribution-reporting-api/blob/main/attribution_scopes.md#attribution-scope-examples >>> >>> Let me know if you have any questions on the example! We are also >>> considering how to best add demo code for this feature although that may >>> take a little longer to share. >>> >>> Thanks! >>> Akash >>> >>> >>> On Wednesday, September 25, 2024 at 8:43:21 AM UTC-7 Alex Russell wrote: >>> >>>> Hey Akash, >>>> >>>> This looks pretty uncontroversial, but I'm not sure from the Explainer >>>> how this fits together in an end-to-end scenario. Is there a fuller chunk >>>> of example code you could point me at? Or update the explainer to show how >>>> this works in practice? >>>> >>>> Best, >>>> >>>> Alex >>>> >>>> On Tuesday, September 10, 2024 at 2:33:12 PM UTC-7 Akash Nadan wrote: >>>> >>>>> Contact emails >>>>> >>>>> akash...@google.com, lin...@chromium.org, john...@chromium.org >>>>> >>>>> Explainer >>>>> >>>>> Attribution Reporting with event-level reports >>>>> <https://github.com/WICG/attribution-reporting-api/blob/main/EVENT.md> >>>>> >>>>> Attribution Reporting API with Aggregatable Reports >>>>> <https://github.com/WICG/attribution-reporting-api/blob/main/AGGREGATE.md> >>>>> >>>>> Aggregation Service for the Attribution Reporting API >>>>> <https://github.com/WICG/attribution-reporting-api/blob/main/AGGREGATION_SERVICE_TEE.md> >>>>> >>>>> Specification >>>>> >>>>> https://wicg.github.io/attribution-reporting-api/ >>>>> >>>>> Blink component >>>>> >>>>> Internals > AttributionReporting >>>>> <https://bugs.chromium.org/p/chromium/issues/list?q=component:Internals%3EAttributionReporting> >>>>> >>>>> TAG review >>>>> >>>>> Still under review >>>>> <https://github.com/w3ctag/design-reviews/issues/724> under the >>>>> original I2S for the Attribution Reporting API >>>>> >>>>> TAG review status >>>>> >>>>> Pending >>>>> >>>>> Summary >>>>> >>>>> We are landing the following changes to the Attribution Reporting API >>>>> focused on: >>>>> >>>>> - >>>>> >>>>> providing more control over the attribution filtering >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> This change is based on ad-tech feedback and the need for more fine >>>>> grained filtering controls before the attribution process takes place. >>>>> >>>>> Currently the API performs filtering after a source is chosen based on >>>>> matching <reporting origin, destination site> fields. This results in API >>>>> callers either not receiving attribution reports or incorrect attribution >>>>> in scenarios where there are multiple different advertisers/campaigns >>>>> that >>>>> all convert on the same destination site. >>>>> >>>>> This change allows API callers to now specify a field called >>>>> "attribution_scopes" which will be used for filtering before starting the >>>>> regular attribution flow. This allows API callers more fine grained >>>>> control >>>>> over the attribution granularity and the ability to receive proper >>>>> attribution reports in the scenario described above (i.e. where there are >>>>> multiple different advertisers/campaigns that all convert on the same >>>>> destination site). >>>>> >>>>> This change directly addresses API caller feedback and allows them to >>>>> have more control over their attribution filtering. >>>>> >>>>> Explainer/Spec changes >>>>> >>>>> 1. >>>>> >>>>> Explainer: >>>>> >>>>> https://github.com/WICG/attribution-reporting-api/blob/main/attribution_scopes.md >>>>> 2. >>>>> >>>>> Spec: https://github.com/WICG/attribution-reporting-api/pull/1215 >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Risks >>>>> Interoperability and Compatibility >>>>> >>>>> This is an optional and fully backwards compatible change. This >>>>> feature provides a new field for specifying filters that can be checked >>>>> before the regular attribution process takes place and does not break any >>>>> pre-existing API or web functionality. >>>>> >>>>> Gecko: No signal (Original request: >>>>> https://github.com/mozilla/standards-positions/issues/791) >>>>> >>>>> WebKit: No signal (Original request: >>>>> https://github.com/WebKit/standards-positions/issues/180) >>>>> >>>>> Web developers: >>>>> https://github.com/WICG/attribution-reporting-api/issues/1229 >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> 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? >>>>> >>>>> No >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Will this feature be supported on all six Blink platforms (Windows, >>>>> Mac, Linux, Chrome OS, Android, and Android WebView)? >>>>> >>>>> The attribution reporting feature will be supported on all platforms >>>>> with the exception of Android WebView >>>>> >>>>> Is this feature fully tested by web-platform-tests >>>>> <https://chromium.googlesource.com/chromium/src/+/main/docs/testing/web_platform_tests.md> >>>>> ? >>>>> >>>>> No, currently the behavior around attribution scopes is not covered in >>>>> WPT due to difficulty of adding significant coverage for the feature >>>>> because of API-mandated delays and noise. However, the feature is covered >>>>> by comprehensive integration tests (commonly referred to as “interop >>>>> tests”) that are also reusable by other implementations. >>>>> >>>>> Estimated milestones >>>>> >>>>> This feature is anticipated to ship as part of Chrome 130 >>>>> <https://chromiumdash.appspot.com/schedule>. >>>>> >>>>> Link to entry on the Chrome Platform Status >>>>> >>>>> https://chromestatus.com/feature/5096560068395008 >>>>> >>>>> Links to previous Intent discussions >>>>> >>>>> Previous I2S: >>>>> >>>>> Intent to Ship: Attribution Reporting API >>>>> <https://groups.google.com/a/chromium.org/g/blink-dev/c/2Rmj5V6FSaY> >>>>> >>>>> Intent to Ship: Attribution Reporting features M117 >>>>> <https://groups.google.com/a/chromium.org/g/blink-dev/c/nWF61c8xu-M/m/uMmH1ewcAQAJ> >>>>> >>>>> Intent to Ship: Attribution Reporting features M118 >>>>> <https://groups.google.com/a/chromium.org/g/blink-dev/c/Mh-mJiyJZFk/m/HlgzpphYBQAJ> >>>>> >>>>> Intent to Ship: Attribution Reporting features M119 >>>>> <https://groups.google.com/a/chromium.org/g/blink-dev/c/6e44SBtEtcQ> >>>>> >>>>> Intent to Ship: Attribution Reporting features M120 >>>>> <https://groups.google.com/a/chromium.org/g/blink-dev/c/jSk3xpNPzGQ/m/VZPsdYgGCAAJ> >>>>> >>>>> Intent to Ship: Attribution Reporting features M121 >>>>> <https://groups.google.com/a/chromium.org/g/blink-dev/c/g9KiC6Rg_mA/m/V679WcWuAQAJ> >>>>> >>>>> Intent to Ship: Attribution Reporting features M123 >>>>> <https://groups.google.com/a/chromium.org/g/blink-dev/c/NE7VGke1Bjc/m/bIX00t4CAAAJ> >>>>> >>>>> Intent to Ship: Attribution Reporting features M124 >>>>> <https://groups.google.com/a/chromium.org/g/blink-dev/c/aregp1li6xk/m/IhBB2z8tBQAJ> >>>>> >>>>> Intent to Ship: Attribution Reporting features M125 >>>>> <https://groups.google.com/a/chromium.org/g/blink-dev/c/9UyhI6SRyxM/m/zgWWckgWAQAJ> >>>>> >>>>> Intent to Ship: Attribution Reporting features M126 >>>>> <https://groups.google.com/a/chromium.org/g/blink-dev/c/7UQR2lPn5KE/m/q_kL6ZiJDgAJ> >>>>> >>>>> Intent to Ship: Attribution Reporting features M127 >>>>> <https://groups.google.com/a/chromium.org/g/blink-dev/c/LAgnyPsJyJg?pli=1> >>>>> >>>>> Intent to Ship: Attribution Reporting features M128 (1) >>>>> <https://groups.google.com/a/chromium.org/g/blink-dev/c/qlsv7fn0zRE/m/SK8upePCCAAJ> >>>>> >>>>> Intent to Ship: Attribution Reporting features M128 (2) >>>>> <https://groups.google.com/a/chromium.org/g/blink-dev/c/VKGn41wMYlg/m/VsNXktqvCAAJ> >>>>> >>>>> Thanks, >>>>> Akash >>>>> >>>> -- 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/7398a938-ca23-49bd-90a9-ffc1f76704c9n%40chromium.org.
