*     >  Gecko: Under 
consideration (https://github.com/mozilla/standards-positions/issues/1245 
<https://github.com/mozilla/standards-positions/issues/1245>)*
This signals thread is for an earlier version of PEPC, and there was a 
request 
<https://github.com/mozilla/standards-positions/issues/1245#issuecomment-3198708478>
 in 
the thread to split out <usermedia> into a separate position thread once 
it's ready. Can you do that? It's not clear from the old thread that the 
current shape of the feature has been reviewed by Gecko.

*     > WebKit: No signal*
Can you request a WebKit position?

Thanks,
Dan
On Tuesday, April 21, 2026 at 10:26:03 AM UTC-7 [email protected] wrote:

> Sorry, LGTM2 % requesting the missing Testing bit in your chromestatus 
> entry.
> On 4/21/26 10:24 a.m., Mike Taylor wrote:
>
> LGTM2
> On 4/21/26 6:52 a.m., Rick Byers wrote:
>
> Perfect, thanks for the answers and cleanups! LGTM1 to ship.
>
> On Mon, Apr 20, 2026 at 1:52 PM Thomas Nguyen <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>> Thank you for reviewing this.
>>
>>> Note that web-exposed features typically live under the 'Blink' 
>>> component, and they get some extra love (like an extra expert triage 
>>> rotation <https://www.chromium.org/blink/blink-triaging/>) to help 
>>> ensure web devs are getting fast and helpful responses and that important 
>>> externally-reported regressions don't get missed. Bugs under 'Internals' 
>>> are normally assumed to not contain important externally-reported issues. 
>>> As long as your team is on top of your bug triage (eg. would notice within 
>>> 1-2 days if someone filed a bug there saying a change broke their website) 
>>> then it's not a big deal, may not be worth the hassle of moving. 
>>> Regardless, does not need to block this intent IMHO. 
>>
>> Thanks for the input. Component UI>Browser>Permissions>, or 
>> UI>Browser>Permissions>Prompts makes more sense, aligning the experience 
>> with the existing behavior of the <geolocation> element
>>
>> Since this is a distinct feature we'd want to track usage of 
>>> independently, it should have a distinct feature ID. Please file an issue 
>>> here 
>>> <https://github.com/web-platform-dx/web-features/issues/new?template=new-feature.yml>
>>>  and 
>>> just tag it as missing for now.
>>
>>  Filed an issue 
>> <https://github.com/web-platform-dx/web-features/issues/3972>, with *feature 
>> definition* tag (I could not find missing tag)
>>
>> There's also a more specific review request 
>>> <https://github.com/w3ctag/design-reviews/issues/1218> a couple weeks 
>>> ago. Probably its the one you should list in chromestatus for this feature 
>>> (and it links to the related prior ones anyway). No need to block this I2S, 
>>> but of course we expect that you'll engage with any feedback that comes 
>>> there in parallel.
>>
>> Regarding the TAG review, thanks for catching that, I accidentally 
>> provided the old link. 
>>
>> It looks like you have just a 50% pass rate (8/16) on the dashboard right 
>>> now. Has someone done a triage pass over these failures? Perhaps some of 
>>> these tests are passing in Chrome infra but failing on wpt.fyi?
>>> Getting all the tests passing doesn't need to block I2S, but we want to 
>>> make sure we understand the current and likely future state of the tests 
>>> since it's a proxy for maturity and spec conformance, and is really 
>>> valuable for any other implementations to follow. 
>>
>> As for the WPT results, you are exactly right. Those tests pass in Chrome 
>> infra but are failing on wpt.fyi (error: secure context required). I have a 
>> CL in progress to rename the tests to .https.html, it will likely take 1–2 
>> days for the changes to sync and for the dashboard to reflect the updated 
>> results.
>>
>> On Mon, Apr 20, 2026 at 1:56 AM Rick Byers <[email protected]> wrote:
>>
>>> I'm excited to see this ship! I see this as another important use of the 
>>> PEPC technology to better enable the browser to be an effective 
>>> intermediary between the site and the user. Just a few nits and questions:
>>>
>>> On Wed, Apr 15, 2026, 10:32 a.m. Chromestatus <
>>> [email protected]> wrote:
>>>
>>>> *Contact emails*
>>>> [email protected], [email protected]
>>>>
>>>> *Explainer*
>>>> https://github.com/WICG/PEPC/blob/main/usermedia_element.md
>>>>
>>>> *Specification*
>>>> https://wicg.github.io/PEPC/permission-elements.html 
>>>>
>>>> *Summary*
>>>> Usermedia Capability Element, is a declarative, user-activated control 
>>>> for accessing the starting and interacting with media streams. This 
>>>> addresses the long-standing problem of permission prompts being triggered 
>>>> directly from JavaScript without a strong signal of user intent. By 
>>>> embedding a browser-controlled element in the page, the user's click 
>>>> provides a clear, intentional signal. This enables a much better prompt UX 
>>>> and, crucially, provides a simple recovery path for users who have 
>>>> previously denied the permission. Note: This feature was previously 
>>>> developed and tested in an Origin Trial as the more generic <permission> 
>>>> element. Based on feedback from developers and other browser vendors, it 
>>>> has evolved into capability-specific elements to provide a more tailored 
>>>> and powerful developer experience. 
>>>>
>>>> *Blink component*
>>>> Public Trackers > Chromium Public Trackers > Chromium > Internals > 
>>>> Permissions > PermissionElement 
>>>> <https://issues.chromium.org/issues?q=customfield1222907:%22Public%20Trackers%20%3E%20Chromium%20Public%20Trackers%20%3E%20Chromium%20%3E%20Internals%20%3E%20Permissions%20%3E%20PermissionElement%22>
>>>
>>>
>>> Note that web-exposed features typically live under the 'Blink' 
>>> component, and they get some extra love (like an extra expert triage 
>>> rotation <https://www.chromium.org/blink/blink-triaging/>) to help 
>>> ensure web devs are getting fast and helpful responses and that important 
>>> externally-reported regressions don't get missed. Bugs under 'Internals' 
>>> are normally assumed to not contain important externally-reported issues. 
>>> As long as your team is on top of your bug triage (eg. would notice within 
>>> 1-2 days if someone filed a bug there saying a change broke their website) 
>>> then it's not a big deal, may not be worth the hassle of moving. 
>>> Regardless, does not need to block this intent IMHO. 
>>>
>>> *Web Feature ID*
>>>> permissions <https://webstatus.dev/features/permissions>
>>>
>>>
>>> Since this is a distinct feature we'd want to track usage of 
>>> independently, it should have a distinct feature ID. Please file an issue 
>>> here 
>>> <https://github.com/web-platform-dx/web-features/issues/new?template=new-feature.yml>
>>>  and 
>>> just tag it as missing for now.
>>>
>>> *Motivation*
>>>> The current web permission model for interacting with user media relies 
>>>> on JavaScript-triggered prompts, giving the user agent no strong signal of 
>>>> user intent. This results in out-of-context prompts, user frustration, and 
>>>> difficult-to-recover-from denial states. We propose the <usermedia> 
>>>> element, or a suite of elements. This will be semantic HTML control with 
>>>> browser-controlled content and strict styling constraints. These 
>>>> constraints are fundamental to the security model, ensuring a very high 
>>>> level of confidence in the user's intent when making a permission decision 
>>>> at both the site and OS level. Crucially, the <usermedia> element evolves 
>>>> beyond simply managing permissions; it streamlines the entire journey by 
>>>> also facilitating starting and interacting with media streams. This often 
>>>> eliminates the need for separate JavaScript API calls, simplifying 
>>>> implementation and creating a more seamless user flow. By providing a 
>>>> clear, consistent, in-page control, this element solves significant user 
>>>> problems related to context blindness and "permission regret," offering a 
>>>> simple recovery path from a previously denied state. The combination of a 
>>>> user-initiated element and a subsequent browser-controlled confirmation UI 
>>>> enhances intent capture, improves accessibility, and prevents manipulative 
>>>> patterns, providing a significantly better experience for both users and 
>>>> developers. 
>>>>
>>>> *Initial public proposal*
>>>> https://github.com/WICG/PEPC/issues/62
>>>>
>>>> *TAG review*
>>>> https://github.com/w3ctag/design-reviews/issues/1079
>>>
>>>
>>> There's also a more specific review request 
>>> <https://github.com/w3ctag/design-reviews/issues/1218> a couple weeks 
>>> ago. Probably its the one you should list in chromestatus for this feature 
>>> (and it links to the related prior ones anyway). No need to block this I2S, 
>>> but of course we expect that you'll engage with any feedback that comes 
>>> there in parallel.
>>>
>>> *TAG review status*
>>>> Issues addressed
>>>>
>>>> *Origin Trial Name*
>>>> UserMediaElement
>>>>
>>>> *Goals for experimentation*
>>>> This Origin Trial serves two primary purposes: ensuring continuity for 
>>>> existing partners who have successfully integrated this pattern, and 
>>>> providing a platform to validate and iterate on the new, 
>>>> capability-specific <usermedia> element. While our previous Origin Trial 
>>>> for <permission> provided strong evidence for the core user-initiated 
>>>> model, feedback from developers and browser vendors prompted us to evolve 
>>>> the design. This new trial is essential for gathering insights on a 
>>>> refined, data-centric API shape to help us reach cross-browser consensus. 
>>>> To ensure a seamless transition and prevent disruption for our valued OT 
>>>> partners, this trial will initially launch with an API shape that is 
>>>> functionally equivalent to the previous <permission> trial, simply using 
>>>> the new <usermedia> element name. This provides a stable foundation from 
>>>> which we will iterate based on further discussion. Our goal is to evolve 
>>>> this element towards our proposed data-centric design (
>>>> https://github.com/WICG/PEPC/blob/main/usermedia_element.md). However, 
>>>> we recognize that this more advanced API has raised compatibility and 
>>>> complexity concerns with developers (
>>>> https://github.com/WICG/PEPC/issues/62). Therefore, a primary 
>>>> objective of this trial is to work closely with the community to address 
>>>> these concerns and refine the final API. TPAC WebRTC minutes 
>>>> https://www.w3.org/2025/11/11-webrtc-minutes.html#551
>>>>
>>>> *Chromium Trial Name*
>>>> UserMediaElement
>>>>
>>>> *Origin Trial documentation link*
>>>> https://github.com/WICG/PEPC/blob/main/usermedia_element.md
>>>>
>>>> *WebFeature UseCounter name*
>>>> kHTMLPermissionElement 
>>>>
>>>> *Risks*
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> *Interoperability and Compatibility*
>>>> There is a risk that this feature fails to be adopted by other 
>>>> browsers. This can be mitigated by backwards designing a reasonable 
>>>> fallback mechanism so that the element can degrade gracefully if the it's 
>>>> in an unsupported environment. 
>>>>
>>>> *Gecko*: Under consideration (
>>>> https://github.com/mozilla/standards-positions/issues/1245)
>>>>
>>>> *WebKit*: No signal
>>>>
>>>> *Web developers*: Positive 
>>>> https://github.com/WICG/PEPC/issues/2#issuecomment-2393820279 
>>>> https://github.com/WICG/PEPC/issues/2#issuecomment-2393861768 
>>>> https://github.com/WICG/PEPC/issues/2#issuecomment-2393911331 
>>>> https://github.com/WICG/PEPC/issues/2#issuecomment-2619657041 
>>>> https://github.com/WICG/PEPC/issues/62#issuecomment-3482975001 
>>>> https://github.com/WICG/PEPC/issues/62#issuecomment-3482981942 
>>>> https://github.com/WICG/PEPC/issues/62#issuecomment-3498355775 
>>>> https://github.com/WICG/PEPC/issues/62#issuecomment-3513734884
>>>>
>>>> *Other signals*:
>>>>
>>>> *Ergonomics*
>>>> No foreseen ergonomics risks.
>>>>
>>>> *Activation*
>>>> A polyfill can help developers use this feature without risking broken 
>>>> functionality on non-supporting browsers.
>>>>
>>>> *Security*
>>>> https://github.com/WICG/PEPC/blob/main/explainer.md#Security
>>>>
>>>> *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? 
>>>> Feature is not shipping on WebView due to it requiring permission 
>>>> manager embedder support. 
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> *Debuggability*
>>>> The element raises issues to the devtools issues panel which help 
>>>> developers debug issues with their usage of the element. 
>>>>
>>>> *Will this feature be supported on all six Blink platforms (Windows, 
>>>> Mac, Linux, ChromeOS, Android, and Android WebView)?*
>>>> No 
>>>> The element is not supported on Android WebView as it requires 
>>>> permission manager support to function and the WebView permission manager 
>>>> defers most permission decisions to the embedder by design. 
>>>>
>>>> *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/html/semantics/permission-element/usermedia
>>>
>>>
>>> It looks like you have just a 50% pass rate (8/16) on the dashboard 
>>> right now. Has someone done a triage pass over these failures? Perhaps some 
>>> of these tests are passing in Chrome infra but failing on wpt.fyi?
>>>
>>> Getting all the tests passing doesn't need to block I2S, but we want to 
>>> make sure we understand the current and likely future state of the tests 
>>> since it's a proxy for maturity and spec conformance, and is really 
>>> valuable for any other implementations to follow. 
>>>
>>> *DevTrial instructions*
>>>> https://github.com/WICG/PEPC/blob/main/HOWTO.md#enabling-usermedia
>>>>
>>>> *Flag name on about://flags*
>>>> *No information provided* 
>>>>
>>>> *Finch feature name*
>>>> UserMediaElement 
>>>>
>>>> *Rollout plan*
>>>> Will ship enabled for all users
>>>>
>>>> *Requires code in //chrome?*
>>>> True
>>>>
>>>> *Tracking bug*
>>>> https://crbug.com/443013457
>>>>
>>>> *Availability expectation*
>>>> Feature is available only in Chromium browsers. We are not aware of 
>>>> other browsers adoption.
>>>>
>>>> *Adoption expectation*
>>>> Feature is used by specific partner(s) to provide functionality within 
>>>> 12 months of launch in Chrome. Partners who are tested the feature in OT 
>>>> are expected to continue usage.
>>>>
>>>> *Adoption plan*
>>>> We are planning to publish on developer.chrome.com and do further 
>>>> partner outreach
>>>>
>>>> *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? 
>>>> No
>>>>
>>>> *Estimated milestones*
>>>> Shipping on desktop 149 
>>>> Origin trial desktop first 144 
>>>> Origin trial desktop last 148 
>>>> DevTrial on desktop 144 
>>>> Shipping on Android 149 
>>>> Origin trial Android first 144 
>>>> Origin trial Android last 148 
>>>> DevTrial on Android 144 
>>>>
>>>> *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). 
>>>> This is an MVP launch. The MVP feature is fully functional and used by 
>>>> developers right now. We are working closely with the WebRTC on post-MVP 
>>>> features, the open topics will based on the foundation of the MVP, that we 
>>>> agreed upon with the WebRTC. Some of the open topics are for example: In 
>>>> the future, we might want to add a parameter to the getUserMedia algorithm 
>>>> so that the algorithm can determine whether the getUserMedia is called 
>>>> from 
>>>> the <usermedia> element or getUserMedia API. Potential to add additional 
>>>> attributes for <usermedia> interface. We're putting finishing touches on 
>>>> the spec now, work-in-progress PR is here, but once that lands we want to 
>>>> ship for M149 so wanted to start the discussion now. 
>>>>
>>>> *Link to entry on the Chrome Platform Status*
>>>> https://chromestatus.com/feature/4926233538330624?gate=6467532078841856
>>>>
>>>> *Links to previous Intent discussions*
>>>> Intent to Prototype: 
>>>> https://groups.google.com/a/chromium.org/d/msgid/blink-dev/692719de.050a0220.17ec37.00c3.GAE%40google.com
>>>> Intent to Experiment: 
>>>> https://groups.google.com/a/chromium.org/d/msgid/blink-dev/6942ed09.050a0220.1050d6.0961.GAE%40google.com
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> 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 [email protected].
>>>> To view this discussion visit 
>>>> https://groups.google.com/a/chromium.org/d/msgid/blink-dev/69dfa184.050a0220.c8e20.03e8.GAE%40google.com
>>>>  
>>>> <https://groups.google.com/a/chromium.org/d/msgid/blink-dev/69dfa184.050a0220.c8e20.03e8.GAE%40google.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer>
>>>> .
>>>>
>>>
>>
>> -- 
>>
>> Thomas Nguyen
>>
>> Software Engineer
>>
>> [email protected]
>>
>> Google Germany GmbH
>>
>> Erika-Mann-Straße 33
>>
>> 80636 München
>>
>> Geschäftsführer: Paul Manicle, Halimah DeLaine Prado
>>
>> Registergericht und -nummer: Hamburg, HRB 86891
>>
>> Sitz der Gesellschaft: Hamburg
>>
>> Diese E-Mail ist vertraulich. Falls Sie diese fälschlicherweise erhalten 
>> haben sollten, leiten Sie diese bitte nicht an jemand anderes weiter, 
>> löschen Sie alle Kopien und Anhänge davon und lassen Sie mich bitte wissen, 
>> dass die E-Mail an die falsche Person gesendet wurde. 
>>
>>      
>>
>> This e-mail is confidential. If you received this communication by 
>> mistake, please don't forward it to anyone else, please erase all copies 
>> and attachments, and please let me know that it has gone to the wrong 
>> person.
>>
> -- 
> 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 visit 
> https://groups.google.com/a/chromium.org/d/msgid/blink-dev/CAFUtAY8VX9jdKZZ_tj%2BaMzZkHeVmE7N%2BFhfcywx4qa9235m6Yw%40mail.gmail.com
>  
> <https://groups.google.com/a/chromium.org/d/msgid/blink-dev/CAFUtAY8VX9jdKZZ_tj%2BaMzZkHeVmE7N%2BFhfcywx4qa9235m6Yw%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 visit 
https://groups.google.com/a/chromium.org/d/msgid/blink-dev/24252e41-4151-4b8d-b8d5-3b0183870dacn%40chromium.org.

Reply via email to