LGTM2 On Friday, November 22, 2024 at 12:47:46 PM UTC+1 Noam Rosenthal wrote:
> On Fri, Nov 22, 2024 at 6:21 AM Domenic Denicola <dome...@chromium.org> > wrote: > >> >> >> On Thu, Nov 21, 2024 at 6:07 PM Noam Rosenthal <nrosent...@chromium.org> >> wrote: >> >>> >>>> >>>> I think it would be worth asking for a standards-position specifically >>>> for the exposing-cross-origin change, as it has security implications and >>>> getting each implementation's perspective would be valuable. >>>> >>>> Alternatively, if you have recorded Working Group minutes or a spec PR >>>> where a Firefox representative was present for consensus on this change, >>>> that'd work for me too. >>>> >>> >>> Sure! We talked about presentation times in detail, including this >>> coarsening in particular and the reasoning for it, in the last WebPerfWG >>> call. Minutes available in this link >>> <https://docs.google.com/document/d/1ZWAUJZBJUvSUyShvKXNEU-cuCe47jpgbR69ckWZUTfI/edit?tab=t.0#heading=h.kb3idfbysfg7>. >>> >>> We've also discussed the TAO thing in particular here >>> <https://docs.google.com/document/d/1tw9QTHWvXg-loG6qaeeosOXTCeH41wst6MehQsc3WwM/edit?tab=t.0#heading=h.ex3ms275azam> >>> . >>> >> >> Thanks. Unfortunately I can't quite find the kind of clearly-supportive >> Gecko statements I'm looking for. Your first link (regarding the new >> timestamps) includes >> >> >> - >> >> Michal: Can Mozilla folks confirm the statements RE the timestamps? >> - >> >> .. end time of event timing for “duration” and LCP, is it marking the >> handover or the presentation time? >> - >> >> Bas: I believe it’s correct, but not 100% sure >> - >> >> Michal: Would you be comfortable exposing both timings? >> - >> >> Bas: I’m inclined to say yes. Maybe there are security and privacy >> concerns? >> >> >> and the second (regarding no longer requiring TAO) includes >> >> >> - >> >> Yoav: Sean you’ll kick off convo on Mozilla side? >> - >> >> Sean: Yes >> - >> >> … I’ll comment in the issue >> >> >> Neither of those were the kind of "Resolved: everybody is OK with this >> precise design" I was hoping for. >> > There was quite a bit more than those quotes, but that's fair. > > >> Given that, maybe it'd be best to just file a Mozilla standards-positions >> request? >> > Done, https://github.com/mozilla/standards-positions/issues/1128 > updated https://chromestatus.com/feature/5128261284397056 > -- 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 visit https://groups.google.com/a/chromium.org/d/msgid/blink-dev/b67b2ee4-7951-4a5f-9899-bc2bc4576b18n%40chromium.org.
