On Wed, Jun 18, 2025 at 6:36 PM Stephen Chenney <schen...@chromium.org> wrote:
> I would like to re-start this review. The spec PR is still waiting due a > third party dependency. I'm in contact with that party to move it along. The spec PR has been merged. Mozilla's position is addressed apart from the concerns about > accessibility, and a request to clarify some caret-color behavior which is > unrelated to the animation (https://issues.chromium.org/issues/425735683). > Specifically, for a11y this feature may lead web sites to make the cursor > less obvious, while for other users is can reduce motion effects, > particularly the irregular flashing you get with animated caret colors and > caret blinking. And sites can already set the caret-color to transparent, > so we're not enabling new bad behavior in my view. > > Thanks, > Stephen. > > On Tuesday, January 28, 2025 at 2:29:17 PM UTC-5 Stephen Chenney wrote: > > Yes Domenic, the PR to clarify when caret- properties apply would address > my questions and at least one of Mozilla's concerns. The CSS F2F this week > is set to discuss the PR and get agreement that it conveys the expectations > of developers. So by Friday we should have enough to know if this can move > forward. > > Mozilla's other concern was related to this being an a11y foot gun, but > then control of caret color is already an a11y foot gun (because you can > make it transparent) and blinking carets can impact motion-sensitive users. > I followed up on the Mozilla issue but haven't heard back. I'll bring it to > their attention at the F2F. > > Cheers, > Stephen. > > On Mon, Jan 27, 2025 at 10:59 PM Domenic Denicola <dome...@chromium.org> > wrote: > > It looks like on ChromeStatus there was a request to reactivate this > review. > > Can you clarify what is preventing https://github.com/ > w3c/csswg-drafts/pull/11373 from landing? Do you believe it addresses all > of Mozilla's concerns? (And your concerns?) > > On Thursday, October 31, 2024 at 12:30:37 AM UTC+9 Chris Harrelson wrote: > > Putting it back in dev trials mode SGTM. > > On Wed, Oct 30, 2024 at 11:29 AM Stephen Chenney <schen...@chromium.org> > wrote: > > The Mozilla folks have some good points that I believe should go back to > the CSS WG, particularly the a11y concerns. I'll put some thought into > concrete proposals and open up spec issues. > > I think shipping is blocked until there is broader browser agreement. Is > it OK if I shift the status back to "Dev Trials and Iterate" and enable it > with Experimental Web Platform features? Can I cancel the need for API > owners to review for now? > > Cheers, > Stephen. > > On Wed, Oct 30, 2024 at 11:12 AM Chris Harrelson <chris...@chromium.org> > wrote: > > Hi, > > I see there was some discussion on the Mozilla standards position with > some possible open questions about a11y aspects. Would you consider any of > them blocking or needing further work? > > On Wed, Oct 30, 2024 at 9:18 AM Stephen Chenney <schen...@chromium.org> > wrote: > > Thanks. WPT issue at https://github.com/web-platform-tests/wpt/issues/ > 48882 > > On Wed, Oct 30, 2024 at 6:12 AM Yoav Weiss (@Shopify) < > yoavwe...@chromium.org> wrote: > > LGTM2 > > It's unfortunate that we can't reliably WPT test this, but I don't think > it should be a blocker. Can you file an issue against WPT to let folks know > that this is not WPT testable today (without flakiness)? > > On Thursday, October 17, 2024 at 2:39:34 AM UTC+2 Stephen Chenney wrote: > > I've linked the WPT test for the style code into the status entry and > updated the test situation. While I could write a rendering test that > worked locally it relies on the caret blinking in web_tests, which is > disabled as a flakiness mitigation. I think it's unwise to try to change > that given the variable blink rates across browsers and the likely > flakiness of any test. I used unit testing for the implementation so we > have test coverage and I also manually tested for things like caret > browsing (which works fine with the feature and does respect caret-color. > > I also added the vendor signals into the status entry. > > Stephen. > > On Wed, Oct 16, 2024 at 7:02 PM Chris Harrelson <chris...@chromium.org> > wrote: > > Great. Could you link to the WPT tests also? > > Also, FTR: I think this is small enough that an independent TAG review is > not necessary. > > On Wed, Oct 16, 2024 at 9:13 AM Stephen Chenney <schen...@chromium.org> > wrote: > > Thanks for the review. > > On Wed, Oct 16, 2024 at 11:24 AM Chris Harrelson <chris...@chromium.org> > wrote: > > Could you please file formal positions requests for Mozilal and Apple? > > > Filed https://github.com/WebKit/standards-positions/issues/417 and > https://github.com/mozilla/standards-positions/issues/1100 > > > Also, CSSWG issue 9707 is still open, why is that? > > > I didn't close the issue when I added WPT tests. Closed now as there are > no action items. > > Stephen. > > > > On Wed, Oct 16, 2024 at 8:21 AM Alex Russell <slightly...@chromium.org> > wrote: > > Thanks for the detail! LGTM1 > > On Saturday, October 12, 2024 at 7:19:06 PM UTC+5:30 Stephen Chenney wrote: > > On Fri, Oct 11, 2024 at 2:23 PM Alex Russell <slightly...@chromium.org> > wrote: > > Is Apple is pushing back on caret animation for battery life reasons? Do > we share that concern? > > > Fortunately not. The issue for Safari is that they render the caret in a > way that defies customization. In the CSS WG discussion the Apple folks > were not opposed, they just wanted it to be a "browsers may support this" > rather than "must", with @supports to detect the situation. > > From a battery perspective using this feature should be a win, or at worst > neutral. There will be no invalidation and repainting of the caret due to > blinking which would typically save battery. However, the feature is likely > to be used with caret-color animation, which does a lot of repainting but > the blinking would not add to the cost. > > Cheers, > Stephen. > > > Best, > > Alex > > On Thursday, October 10, 2024 at 6:17:12 AM UTC-7 Chromestatus wrote: > > Contact emails schen...@chromium.org > > Explainer https://drafts.csswg.org/css-ui/#caret-animation > https://github.com/w3c/csswg-drafts/issues/9707 > > Specification https://drafts.csswg.org/css-ui/#caret-animation > > Summary > > Chromium supports animation of the caret-color property, but when animated > the default blinking behavior of the caret interferes with the animation. > For instance, see the example at https://drafts.csswg.org/css- > ui/#caret-animation where an animation from blue to red and back is > rendered as a blinking cursor that is randomly blue or red. The CSS > caret-animation property has two possible values: auto and manual, where > auto means browser default (blinking) and manual means the page author is > controlling the caret animation. In addition, via a user stylesheet, it > allows users who are disturbed by or have adverse reactions to blinking or > flashing visuals to disable the blinking. > > > Blink component Blink>CSS > <https://bugs.chromium.org/p/chromium/issues/list?q=component:Blink%3ECSS> > > Search tags caret-color <http:///features#tags:caret-color>, > caret-animation <http:///features#tags:caret-animation> > > TAG review None > > TAG review status Not applicable > > Risks > > > Interoperability and Compatibility > > None > > > *Gecko*: Positive Supported the spec change. > > *WebKit*: Neutral In spec discussions, Safari indicated that their caret > does not support color animation and cannot be customized, so they are > unlikely to implement this spec feature. > > *Web developers*: No signals > > *Other signals*: > > Ergonomics > > Likely to be used with existing support for caret-color animation to > improve the behavior of that feature. > > > Activation > > No risks. > > > Security > > None. > > > 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 specific Webview risk. > > > Debuggability > > Support in DevTools. > > > 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 > > Tests will land with the feature. I have confirmed that WPT can be created > to test the feature. > > > Flag name on chrome://flags Experimental web platform features > > Finch feature name CSSCaretAnimation > > Requires code in //chrome? False > > Tracking bug https://issues.chromium.org/issues/329301988 > > Measurement Through usual CSS feature counters. > > Availability expectation It's in the spec and relatively easy to > implement, so I would expect at least Firefox to implement. WebKit maybe > not due to more complex caret painting. > > Adoption expectation I would expect almost anyone animating the caret > color to use this feature. caret-color itself has over 12% usage per page > load. It is rarely animated (maybe 0.016% of loads) but that may well be > due to the issues addressed by this change. So I would expect animated > caret-color to maybe hit 1% over time. > > Adoption plan I would rely on organic adoption once the feature is out > and publicized. I will publicize it. > > Non-OSS dependencies > > Does the feature depend on any code or APIs outside the Chromium open > source repository and its open-source dependencies to function? > None. > > Estimated milestones Shipping on desktop 133 Shipping on Android 133 Shipping > on WebView 133 > > 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). > The feature is in the spec draft and was recently discussed and resolved > in the working group. > > Link to entry on the Chrome Platform Status https://chromestatus.com/ > feature/5082469066604544?gate=5119320993300480 > > 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/fddf09e9-6bc7-468b-83cd- > cf243ac3a50fn%40chromium.org > <https://groups.google.com/a/chromium.org/d/msgid/blink-dev/fddf09e9-6bc7-468b-83cd-cf243ac3a50fn%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 blink-dev+unsubscr...@chromium.org. > To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/a/ > chromium.org/d/msgid/blink-dev/CAGsbWzQr5tYkCtfQZAOTE8xsroUWX > QiGvjEQgRtF9yhJLxUO8w%40mail.gmail.com > <https://groups.google.com/a/chromium.org/d/msgid/blink-dev/CAGsbWzQr5tYkCtfQZAOTE8xsroUWXQiGvjEQgRtF9yhJLxUO8w%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 visit https://groups.google.com/a/ > chromium.org/d/msgid/blink-dev/CAGsbWzQx2dr93vTsHhANFOuF_ > zqs%3DexpnzfL2cihAgaRHmxKEw%40mail.gmail.com > <https://groups.google.com/a/chromium.org/d/msgid/blink-dev/CAGsbWzQx2dr93vTsHhANFOuF_zqs%3DexpnzfL2cihAgaRHmxKEw%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 visit https://groups.google.com/a/ > chromium.org/d/msgid/blink-dev/CAGsbWzTe%3DLX%3DU33U5mbhNtuAV4Bw%2B% > 2BUKAJFLRDYsyZ-oy26a6g%40mail.gmail.com > <https://groups.google.com/a/chromium.org/d/msgid/blink-dev/CAGsbWzTe%3DLX%3DU33U5mbhNtuAV4Bw%2B%2BUKAJFLRDYsyZ-oy26a6g%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 visit https://groups.google.com/a/chromium.org/d/msgid/blink-dev/CAGsbWzRUfzfafZxnjNiRcTyOpQG_ag7nhLT9Kja%3DFBKL%2BQWE7w%40mail.gmail.com.
