Is there a blacklist of "special schemes" that this change won't touch? Who
maintains that list?
This seems a bit dangerous, in that if a new scheme is deployed that is
"special", code intended for handling non-special schemes will try to parse
it.
Note that the term "special" in the URL specific
Hey all,
Another update for CHIPS, we will be rolling out to 5% stable starting
tomorrow. Canary/beta/dev will remain enabled at 50%.
Thanks,
Dylan
On Thu, Feb 9, 2023 at 11:36 AM Dylan Cutler wrote:
> Hey all,
>
> We have enabled the PartitionedCookies feature on 1% of stable. We will
> conti
To clarify the signals from Gecko and WebKit, "No signal" should be
considered as removed from both explanations.
Hoping the Blink API owners approve this experiment - it's crucial in order
to achieve key customer use cases.
Thanks,
-Ken
On Wed, Feb 22, 2023 at 3:20 PM Corentin Wallez
wrote:
Hey all,
This is an I2E for the WebGPU / WebCodecs integration point that is not
part of the WebGPU v1 shipment as the WebGPU W3C group decided to remove it
from the V1 milestone. However it is a critical integration point for the
video applications looking to use WebGPU as part of their video pro
Contact emailsnbur...@chromium.org, smcgr...@chromium.org
Explainerhttps://crbug.com/1385136 - see comment 14 for screenshot
SpecificationNot applicable
Design docs
(Google internal only, sorry):
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1hCIzyBALzpFPuHQ_xCNvIpSrMThq8PA6Qgi0M2iF9vk/edit?resourcekey=0-V
*Contact emails*
nsatra...@chromium.org, identity-...@chromium.org
*Explainer*
https://github.com/w3c/webauthn/wiki/Explainer:-WebAuthn-Large-Blob-Extension
*Specification*
https://www.w3.org/TR/webauthn-2/#sctn-large-blob-extension
*Summary*
The WebAuthn large blob extension allows relying part
LGTM3
On Wed, Feb 22, 2023 at 11:29 AM slightlyoff via Chromestatus <
admin+slightly...@cr-status.appspotmail.com> wrote:
> LGTM2
>
> --
> 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
LGTM3
On Wed, Feb 22, 2023 at 8:07 AM Noam Rosenthal
wrote:
> Anyone for a LGTM3? :)
>
> On Wed, Feb 15, 2023 at 6:24 PM Mike Taylor
> wrote:
>
>> LGTM2
>>
>> On Wed, Feb 15, 2023 at 9:58 AM Yoav Weiss
>> wrote:
>>
>>> LGTM1
>>>
>>> Thanks for cleaning this up and landing on a solution that's
Adding the usecounter and optimistically defaulting to enable it (while
keeping an eye on the numbers) would also work for me.
On Wed, Feb 22, 2023 at 5:27 PM Rick Byers wrote:
> If this only ever caused connections that previously failed to now succeed
> as they do in other browsers, then the r
LGTM2
--
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/chro
If this only ever caused connections that previously failed to now succeed
as they do in other browsers, then the risk of it causing a compat issue is
exceedingly low right? Perhaps this is more of a bugfix than a breaking API
change?
I see the implementation is already behind a base::Feature. One
On Wed, Feb 22, 2023 at 3:32 PM Jiacheng Guo wrote:
> We don't currently have a use counter for it.
> Does it make sense to add the port overflow check under a flag and a
> usecounter as well to record the frequency of setting URL ports with an
> overflow value.
>
I think it would make sense. If
On Wed, Feb 22, 2023 at 4:43 PM Mike Taylor wrote:
>
> On 2/22/23 8:21 AM, 'Jiacheng Guo' via blink-dev wrote:
>
> Contact emails g...@google.com
>
> Explainer None
>
>
An explainer (even inline) would be helpful to get a better understanding
of what this change does.
Does it impact only URL() ob
LGTM to experiment from 112 to 114 inclusive.
On 2/21/23 8:47 PM, Yi Gu wrote:
Hi Mike
Our plan is to run the origin trial from M112 to M114 (inclusive).
Yi
On Tue, Feb 21, 2023 at 8:27 PM Mike Taylor
wrote:
(Apology for the delay in responding...) I only see M112 listed as
a mile
On 2/22/23 8:21 AM, 'Jiacheng Guo' via blink-dev wrote:
Contact emails
g...@google.com
Explainer
None
Specification
https://url.spec.whatwg.org/#url-parsing
Summary
URLs with non-special schemes will be supported in chrome.
`non-speicial://test.com:12
We don't currently have a use counter for it.
Does it make sense to add the port overflow check under a flag and a
usecounter as well to record the frequency of setting URL ports with an
overflow value.
We can collect data first and then gradually enable the feature based on
the data we collected.
Do you know the reasons for not prompting the user in that case?
I wonder if there's some history here. +Carlos IL
+Emily
Stark +Mike West - do y'all
know?
On Wed, Feb 22, 2023 at 8:46 AM Manuel Rego Casasnovas
wrote:
> LGTM1
>
> This aligns us with the rest of browsers, thanks for fixing it.
On Wed, Feb 22, 2023 at 2:23 PM 'Jiacheng Guo' via blink-dev <
blink-dev@chromium.org> wrote:
> The implementation can be found at
> https://chromium-review.googlesource.com/c/chromium/src/+/4252309
>
> On Wed, Feb 22, 2023 at 9:39 PM Jiacheng Guo wrote:
>
>> Contact emails...@google.com
>>
>> Ex
The implementation can be found at
https://chromium-review.googlesource.com/c/chromium/src/+/4252309
On Wed, Feb 22, 2023 at 9:39 PM Jiacheng Guo wrote:
> Contact emails...@google.com
>
> ExplainerThis is an implementation of an established standard.
>
> Specificationhttps://url.spec.whatwg.org/
Contact emails...@google.com
ExplainerNone
Specificationhttps://url.spec.whatwg.org/#url-parsing
Summary
URLs with non-special schemes will be supported in chrome. `non-speicial://
test.com:1234/path` will be become a valid URL. One can access and set the
URL properties such as host, port and p
Contact emails...@google.com
ExplainerThis is an implementation of an established standard.
Specificationhttps://url.spec.whatwg.org/#dom-url-port
Summary
The port value will be checked when setting url.port. All the values that
overflows the 16-bit numeric limit will be no longer valid. For in
21 matches
Mail list logo
