Re: [blink-dev] Intent to Ship: Support creating ClipboardItem with Promise

LGTM2. I agree with Daniel's comments that a couple sentences of explainer would have helped here. Note that the WPTs are showing as failing on wpt.fyi because your CL marked the new feature as "test" instead of "experimental"

Re: [blink-dev] Web-Facing Change PSA: navigator.storage no longer an EventTarget

> having the ability to kill-switch this with a flag would be advisable Is that possible? My understanding is that it is not. If it were, then it would have been gated behind the (never-exposed) flag to begin with. > Have we done any kind of research to determine that sites weren't attempting to

Re: [blink-dev] Web-Facing Change PSA: navigator.storage no longer an EventTarget

On 10/30/24 7:54 PM, Chromestatus wrote: Contact emails est...@chromium.org Specification https://storage.spec.whatwg.org Summary navigator.storage is no longer an EventTarget navigator.storage was made an EventTarget for the Storage Pressure Event, which never

[blink-dev] Web-Facing Change PSA: navigator.storage no longer an EventTarget

Contact emails est...@chromium.org Specification https://storage.spec.whatwg.org Summary navigator.storage is no longer an EventTarget navigator.storage was made an EventTarget for the Storage Pressure Event, which never made it past the prototype phase: https://chromestatus.com/feature/5666

Re: [blink-dev] Web-Facing Change PSA: Throw exception for popovers/dialogs in non-active documents

On Wed, Oct 30, 2024 at 1:38 PM Yoav Weiss (@Shopify) < yoavwe...@chromium.org> wrote: > I agree that the "non-active documents" part would be a fraction of the > usage you stated, and hence likely very small. > > Having a Finch kill-switch handy and carefully monitoring the rollout > sound like a

Re: [blink-dev] Web-Facing Change PSA: Throw exception for popovers/dialogs in non-active documents

I agree that the "non-active documents" part would be a fraction of the usage you stated, and hence likely very small. Having a Finch kill-switch handy and carefully monitoring the rollout sound like a reasonable approach to me. On Wed, Oct 30, 2024 at 8:06 PM Mason Freed wrote: > On Wed, Oct 3

Re: [blink-dev] Web-Facing Change PSA: Throw exception for popovers/dialogs in non-active documents

On Wed, Oct 30, 2024 at 3:47 AM Yoav Weiss (@Shopify) < yoavwe...@chromium.org> wrote: > What are the current usecounters for `showPopover()` and `showModal()`? > Have we looked at current usage to have enough confidence that it's > currently being try/catched? > Yeah, good questions. So there ar

Re: [blink-dev] Intent to Ship: Support creating ClipboardItem with Promise

Done. On Wednesday, October 30, 2024 at 3:50:25 PM UTC+5:30 Yoav Weiss (@Shopify) wrote: > Can y'all flip the review bits in the chromestatus entry? > > On Fri, Oct 25, 2024 at 11:22 AM Daniel Bratell wrote: > >> LGTM1 - but I do have some comments. >> >> It's good catching up here, but I rec

Re: [blink-dev] Intent to Ship: File System Access on Android and WebView

It seems like the "Interoperability and Compatibility" section for this Intent is misleading: shipping a piece of an API can cause compatibility problems if developers were feature-detecting the API as a whole, and then a function is missing or doesn't work *after* they've already committed to the

Re: [blink-dev] Re: Intent to Ship: CSS caret-animation property

Putting it back in dev trials mode SGTM. On Wed, Oct 30, 2024 at 11:29 AM Stephen Chenney 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

Re: [blink-dev] Re: Intent to Ship: CSS caret-animation property

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 "

Re: [blink-dev] Re: Intent to Extend Experiment: Keyboard-focusable scroll containers

LGTM to extend the deprecation trial till M138 inclusive. The process requires "significant progress", and I believe shipping the bug fixes in M130 qualifies as such. On Wed, Oct 30, 2024 at 11:29 AM Yoav Weiss (@Shopify) < yo

Re: [blink-dev] Re: Intent to Ship: CSS caret-animation property

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 wrote: > Thanks. WPT issue at > https://github.com/web-pla

Re: [blink-dev] Intent to Ship: Ignore Strict-Transport-Security for localhost

LGTM3 /Daniel On 2024-10-30 11:13, Yoav Weiss (@Shopify) wrote: LGTM2 On Fri, Oct 25, 2024 at 8:48 PM Eric Lawrence wrote: > This seems like a good change, but I notice that it has no flag associated with it Okay, patchset 8. https://chromium-review.googlesource.com/c/chromi

[blink-dev] Intent to Experiment: Document-Isolation-Policy

Contact emails cl...@google.com Explainer https://github.com/WICG/document-isolation-policy/blob/main/README.md Specification https://wicg.github.io/document-isolation-policy Summary Document-Isolation-Policy allows a document to enable crossOriginIsolation for itself, without having to dep

Re: [blink-dev] Intent to Ship: Protected Audience: Selectable Reporting IDs

Previously we had buyerAndSellerReportingId and buyerReportingId to allow buyers and sellers to report information that's jointly k-anonymous with the other information that's reported. But we heard that people like to pick from a selection of reporting IDs, similar to how they pick from a sele

Re: [blink-dev] Re: Intent to Ship: CSS caret-animation property

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 a

Re: [blink-dev] Intent to Ship: File System Access on Android and WebView

Yes, we use dirHandle.getFileHandle(name, { create: true }). We use that to create new files in the chosen folder. That is fundamental to how our PWA saves data in folders (and I'd have thought fundamental to the use of a directory picker). On Wed, 30 Oct 2024 at 08:40, Joel Hockey wrote: > I've

Re: [blink-dev] Web-Facing Change PSA: Throw exception for popovers/dialogs in non-active documents

What are the current usecounters for `showPopover()` and `showModal()`? Have we looked at current usage to have enough confidence that it's currently being try/catched? On Tue, Oct 29, 2024 at 4:50 PM Mason Freed wrote: > Contact emailsmas...@chromium.org > > Specificationhttps://github.com/what

Re: [blink-dev] Re: Intent to Extend Experiment: Keyboard-focusable scroll containers

Just to see I understand the situation - while the deprecation trial started in M127, issues with the path we want developers to take only shipped in 130? On Tue, Oct 29, 2024 at 10:31 PM Di Zhang wrote: > I noticed the above template drafted email makes it sound like I am > talking about the fe

Re: [blink-dev] Intent to Ship: Support creating ClipboardItem with Promise

Can y'all flip the review bits in the chromestatus entry? On Fri, Oct 25, 2024 at 11:22 AM Daniel Bratell wrote: > LGTM1 - but I do have some comments. > > It's good catching up here, but I recommend always to write an explainer. > For a trivial change, it might be a trivial explainer, but just

Re: [blink-dev] Intent to Ship: Protected Audience: Selectable Reporting IDs

On Monday, October 28, 2024 at 1:17:52 AM UTC+1 Mike Taylor wrote: LGTM1 - there's clearly developer demand for this use case. Given that k-anon is still required for sites to get the "deal ID" in reporting, it's not regressing privacy AFAIU. On 10/16/24 10:34 AM, 'Orr Bernstein' via blink-de

Re: [blink-dev] Intent to Ship: Ignore Strict-Transport-Security for localhost

LGTM2 On Fri, Oct 25, 2024 at 8:48 PM Eric Lawrence wrote: > > This seems like a good change, but I notice that it has no flag > associated with it > > Okay, patchset 8. > https://chromium-review.googlesource.com/c/chromium/src/+/5923046 > > BASE_FEATURE(kIgnoreHSTSForLocalhost, > "

Re: [blink-dev] Re: Intent to Ship: CSS caret-animation property

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 li

Re: [blink-dev] Intent to Ship: Protected Audience Bidding & Auction Services

LGTM2 On Tuesday, October 29, 2024 at 7:27:52 PM UTC+1 Mike Taylor wrote: > Thanks - > > LGTM1 > On 10/29/24 10:33 AM, Paul Jensen wrote: > > On a related note, we requested a TAG review of Bidding and Auction > Services here , and > update

Re: [blink-dev] Intent to Ship: File System Access on Android and WebView

I've got fixes for mime-types and save-as. Ashley, I tried out the app and saw how it fails for "save as project folder". I haven't looked at the JS code you have, but I'm guessing that the problem is that the android implementation of FileSystemHandle is missing some features such as dirHandle.g