Re: [blink-dev] Intent to Ship: PWA manifest unique id - desktop

LGTM1. This seems like a small and useful addition to the PWA landscape. On Wed, Sep 29, 2021 at 8:18 PM Phillis Tang wrote: > Another thing is that this feature is a blocker for other features that > need a formally defined identifier for web apps to be referenced. > See in the scope extension

Re: [blink-dev] Intent to Deprecate: The "basic-card" method of PaymentRequest API

Thanks for the review! On Wednesday, September 29, 2021 at 2:07:18 AM UTC-4 mk...@chromium.org wrote: > LGTM2. Thanks for following up on the feedback here. > > -mike > > > On Wed, Sep 29, 2021 at 7:56 AM Yoav Weiss wrote: > >> >> >> On Wed, Sep 29, 2021 at 7:50 AM Eiji Kitamura >> wrote: >>

Re: [blink-dev] Intent to Ship: PWA manifest unique id - desktop

Another thing is that this feature is a blocker for other features that need a formally defined identifier for web apps to be referenced. See in the scope extension proposal , it needs to use web app

Re: [blink-dev] Intent to Ship: PWA manifest unique id - desktop

Hi Yoav, Yes that's the correct use case. It avoids double installs, and also allows already installed apps to apply manifest updates with start_url changes. And yes ID matching is limited to the same origin. See the processing algorithm

RE: [EXTERNAL] Re: [blink-dev] Intent to Implement and Ship: Add support for Promise to Blobs in clipboard item

That's not really an explainer. Can you expand on what this method does, how would the new method look like and how would developers use it? Sorry for not being clear in my initial I2S. The change is fairly trivial from a developer's perspective and has no compat risks so I wasn't sure an i2S wa

[blink-dev] Intent to Ship: URL Protocol Handler Registration for PWAs

Contact emails samuel.t...@microsoft.com, mjack...@microsoft.com, luigo...@microsoft.com, dmu...@chromium.org Explainer https://github.com/MicrosoftEdge/MSEdgeExplaine

Re: [blink-dev] SameSiteByDefaultCookies and CookiesWithoutSameSiteMustBeSecure removed from Chrome 94

Flags come and go as a natural part of the development process; they're almost an internal thing. If you found a particular flag useful, though, consider filing a feature request for a more well-engineered version of the functionality; a permanent fix often looks quite different from a "temporarily

Re: [blink-dev] Intent to Ship: PWA manifest unique id - desktop

On Tue, Sep 28, 2021 at 12:08 AM Phillis Tang wrote: > Contact emailsphil...@chromium.org, pwa-...@chromium.org > > Explainerhttps://github.com/phill/pwa-unique-id/blob/main/explainer.md > There's a lot there, so I want to verify I understand what the feature does: Without an ID, the browser

Re: [blink-dev] SameSiteByDefaultCookies and CookiesWithoutSameSiteMustBeSecure removed from Chrome 94

On Wednesday, 29 September 2021 at 17:56:49 UTC+2 km...@chromium.org wrote: > All chrome://flags are temporary, and should never be relied on as > permanent controls over behavior: > > https://chromium.googlesource.com/chromium/src.git/+/refs/heads/main/docs/flag_expiry.md#Do-Not-Depend-On-Flag

Re: [blink-dev] SameSiteByDefaultCookies and CookiesWithoutSameSiteMustBeSecure removed from Chrome 94

All chrome://flags are temporary, and should never be relied on as permanent controls over behavior: https://chromium.googlesource.com/chromium/src.git/+/refs/heads/main/docs/flag_expiry.md#Do-Not-Depend-On-Flags On Wed, Sep 29, 2021 at 8:39 AM Luca Fabbri wrote: > From https://www.chromium.org/

[blink-dev] Re: Form Controls Refresh enabled

Well, this must be a joke? Why would you turn on something that will make most of the world add this style in their websites? I don't know who's idea was to put this horrible thing by default and give no control to users to stop it but it was bad decision. The new look is alright but the black o

[blink-dev] SameSiteByDefaultCookies and CookiesWithoutSameSiteMustBeSecure removed from Chrome 94

>From https://www.chromium.org/updates/same-site I read: *Mar 18, 2021:* The flags #same-site-by-default-cookies and #cookies-without-same-site-must-be-secure have been removed from chrome://flags as of Chrome 91, as the behavior is now enabled by default. In Chrome 94, the command-line flag -

[blink-dev] Intent to Extend Experiment: Storage Foundation API

Hello blink-dev, We’d like to ask for one last extension to our Origin Trial, from M96 to M98. As mentioned in our previous I2E , we have indeed created a new surface on OPFS (Acce

Re: [blink-dev] Intent to Ship: Content-Security-Policy delivery via response headers for dedicated workers.

On Wed, Sep 29, 2021 at 4:16 PM Antonio Sartori wrote: > > > On Wed, Sep 29, 2021 at 2:50 PM Yoav Weiss wrote: > >> >> >> On Wed, Sep 29, 2021 at 2:14 PM Antonio Sartori < >> antoniosart...@chromium.org> wrote: >> >>> From a quick search through httparchive (data from >>> httparchive.requests.20

Re: [blink-dev] Intent to Implement and Ship: Add support for Promise to Blobs in clipboard item

On 9/29/21 7:53 AM, Yoav Weiss wrote: On Wed, Sep 29, 2021 at 3:02 AM 'Anupam Snigdha' via blink-dev mailto:blink-dev@chromium.org>> wrote: Interoperability and Compatibility /Gecko/: In Development(https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1619947

Re: [blink-dev] Intent to Ship: WebTransport

On Wed, Sep 29, 2021 at 12:32 PM Yutaka Hirano wrote: > Hi Philip, > > On Wed, Sep 29, 2021 at 6:29 PM Philip Jägenstedt > wrote: > >> Hi Yutaka, >> >> This is a big new feature and a lot to go over. When looking at the >> spec+Blink IDL, I noticed the API didn't require secure contexts: >> http

Re: [blink-dev] Intent to Ship: Content-Security-Policy delivery via response headers for dedicated workers.

On Wed, Sep 29, 2021 at 2:50 PM Yoav Weiss wrote: > > > On Wed, Sep 29, 2021 at 2:14 PM Antonio Sartori < > antoniosart...@chromium.org> wrote: > >> From a quick search through httparchive (data from >> httparchive.requests.2021_07_01_desktop) it looks like out of 549,668 >> outgoing requests for

Re: [blink-dev] Intent to Ship: Content-Security-Policy delivery via response headers for dedicated workers.

On Wed, Sep 29, 2021 at 2:14 PM Antonio Sartori wrote: > From a quick search through httparchive (data from > httparchive.requests.2021_07_01_desktop) it looks like out of 549,668 > outgoing requests for dedicated workers, 457,780 of them returned a > Content-Security-Policy header (hence ~80%).

Re: [blink-dev] Intent to Ship: Content-Security-Policy delivery via response headers for dedicated workers.

>From a quick search through httparchive (data from httparchive.requests.2021_07_01_desktop) it looks like out of 549,668 outgoing requests for dedicated workers, 457,780 of them returned a Content-Security-Policy header (hence ~80%). As a comparison, from the same data it looks like ~15% of docume

Re: [blink-dev] Intent to Implement and Ship: Add support for Promise to Blobs in clipboard item

On Wed, Sep 29, 2021 at 3:02 AM 'Anupam Snigdha' via blink-dev < blink-dev@chromium.org> wrote: > Contact emails > > sni...@microsoft.com, m...@chromium.org > > > Explainer > > https://www.w3.org/TR/clipboard-apis/#typedefdef-clipboarditemdata > That's not really an explainer. Can you expand on w

Re: [blink-dev] Intent to Ship: Content-Security-Policy delivery via response headers for dedicated workers.

Have you looked into the compatibility implications of changing behavior here? How often would that remove restrictions from existing web content? How often do dedicated workers currently get CSP headers which will now be applied? On Mon, Sep 27, 2021 at 12:50 PM Antonio Sartori < antoniosart...@c

Re: [blink-dev] Intent to Ship: WebTransport

Hi Philip, On Wed, Sep 29, 2021 at 6:29 PM Philip Jägenstedt wrote: > Hi Yutaka, > > This is a big new feature and a lot to go over. When looking at the > spec+Blink IDL, I noticed the API didn't require secure contexts: > https://bugs.chromium.org/p/chromium/issues/detail?id=1253275 > > It look

Re: [blink-dev] Intent to Ship: WebTransport

Hi Yutaka, This is a big new feature and a lot to go over. When looking at the spec+Blink IDL, I noticed the API didn't require secure contexts: https://bugs.chromium.org/p/chromium/issues/detail?id=1253275 It looks like that's being fixed now, which is great! I'll reply again when I've spent som