[blink-dev] Intent to Prototype & Ship: activeViewTransition property on document

Contact emailsvmp...@google.com Explainer https://github.com/WICG/view-transitions/blob/main/active-view-transition.md Specificationhttps://drafts.csswg.org/css-view-transitions-2 Summary View Transitions API allows developers to start visual transitions between different states. The primary SP

Re: [blink-dev] Intent to Ship: View Transitions: Inherit more animation properties

On Wed, Jul 23, 2025 at 11:32 AM Chris Harrelson wrote: > LGTM1 > > On Mon, Jul 21, 2025 at 9:53 AM Chromestatus < > ad...@cr-status.appspotmail.com> wrote: > >> Contact emails vmp...@google.com >> >> Explainer None >> >> Specification https://www.w3.org/TR/css-view-transitions-2 >> >> Summary >>

Re: [blink-dev] Re: Intent to Ship: Secure Payment Confirmation: UX Refresh

Thanks Stephen, that makes sense. LGTM2 On Tuesday, July 15, 2025 at 3:20:00 PM UTC-4 Slobodan Pejic wrote: > Thanks Domenic, I have filed an issue to address this problem with the > secure-payment-confirmation specification (#307 >

[blink-dev] Re: Intent to Extend Experiment: Playout Statistics API for WebAudio

LGTM to extend to 142 inclusive On Tuesday, July 8, 2025 at 8:47:42 AM UTC-4 Chromestatus wrote: > Contact emails fhernqv...@google.com, o...@google.com, hongc...@google.com, > agpa...@google.com, gui...@google.com > > Explainer https://github.com/WICG/web_audio_playout > > Specification https

[blink-dev] Re: Intent to Ship: Secure Payment Confirmation: UX Refresh

Hey, with regards to providing logos. My understanding is that this would be displayed in a trusted content. Is there some affordances to clearly indicate that these logos are provided by the merchants? I'm a little concerned for cases like displaying arbitrary content in trusted UI because of

Re: [blink-dev] Re: Intent to Ship: highlightsFromPoint API

LGTM3 On Wednesday, July 9, 2025 at 11:10:37 AM UTC-4 Daniel Bratell wrote: > LGTM2 > > /Daniel > On 2025-07-09 17:09, Chris Harrelson wrote: > > LGTM1 > > On Tue, Jul 8, 2025 at 11:19 AM 'Fernando Fiori' via blink-dev < > blink-dev@chromium.org> wrote: > >> Hi, >> >> I'm reactivating this thread

Re: [blink-dev] Intent to Ship: View transition pseudos inherit animation-delay.

On Wednesday, June 25, 2025 at 11:28:33 AM UTC-4 Alex Russell wrote: LGTM2. Is there good documentation (e.g. in MDN) about which properties are inherited and from where? And how do CSS custom properties inherit in this parallel tree? Custom properties don't have any special treatment in thi

Re: [blink-dev] Re: Intent to Implement and Ship: Http cookie prefix

LGTM2, same conditions On Wednesday, June 25, 2025 at 11:28:27 AM UTC-4 Mike Taylor wrote: > LGTM1, but conditioned on the spec work landing before shipping anything. > On 6/25/25 1:00 a.m., Yoav Weiss (@Shopify) wrote: > > > > On Wed, Jun 25, 2025 at 4:18 AM Vladim

[blink-dev] Re: Intent to Ship: Secure Payment Confirmation: Browser Bound Keys

mismatch (on top of not recognizing the attacker's passkey). > > To be clear, if WebAuthn introduces a form of device-binding, Chrome will > continue to provide browser bound keys (i.e., there is no code or spec to > switch browser bound key provider to WebAuthn). When or if WebAu

[blink-dev] Re: Intent to Ship: CSS counter() and counters() in alt text of 'content' property

This feature seems to be marked at-risk due to implementation complexity. It isn't clear whether this would mean that to implement this, some features have to be less performant. Do you expect that this feature adds any performance problems? I also had a question about the lack of Web Developer

[blink-dev] Re: Intent to Implement and Ship: Http cookie prefix

On Thursday, June 19, 2025 at 9:48:37 AM UTC-4 Yoav Weiss wrote: Contact emailsyoavwe...@chromium.org Explainer This will add the cookie name prefix `__Http-`. Cookies that would start with that prefix would only be able to be set using the `Set-Cookie` HTTP header and will have to have an `ht

Re: [blink-dev] Intent to Ship: CSS typed arithmetic

LGTM2 On Tuesday, June 24, 2025 at 8:33:08 AM UTC-4 Mike Taylor wrote: > This is an awesome improvement to the testing story, thank you very much. > > LGTM1 > On 6/23/25 8:18 a.m., Daniil Sakhapov wrote: > > I've added a bunch of what you've requested in > https://wpt.fyi/results/css/css-values/

Re: [blink-dev] Re: [EXTERNAL] Re: Intent to Ship: Support width and height as presentation attributes on nested elements

On Tuesday, June 24, 2025 at 4:21:45 AM UTC-4 Yoav Weiss wrote: Thanks for working on these!! +Vladimir Levin +Chris Harrelson - what would it take to add these to the CSSWG agenda? (and maybe get eyes on the WPT review) There's been some recent discussion on the issue, so I would

[blink-dev] Re: Intent to Ship: Secure Payment Confirmation: Browser Bound Keys

On Tuesday, June 10, 2025 at 2:47:10 PM UTC-4 Chromestatus wrote: Contact emails slobo...@chromium.org, smcgr...@chromium.org, rous...@chromium.org Explainer https://github.com/w3c/secure-payment-confirmation/issues/271 In the explainer you mention the following: > It is worth noting that t

[blink-dev] Web-Facing Change PSA: Scroll Anchoring Priority Candidate Fix

Contact emailsvmp...@chromium.org SpecificationNone Summary Currently, scroll anchoring algorithm selects priority candidates when they are available as anchor targets. The priority candidates are currently a focused editable element and find-in-page highlights. This can cause suboptimal user ex

Re: [blink-dev] Intent to ship: WebGPU: 3D texture support for BC and ASTC compressed formats

LGTM3 On Tuesday, June 10, 2025 at 11:49:13 PM UTC-4 Yoav Weiss wrote: > LGTM2 > > On Friday, June 6, 2025 at 5:33:12 PM UTC+2 Mehmet Oguz Derin wrote: > >> Likewise, thank you very much for all the effort and hard work to support >> the features 🙇 >> >> On Thursday, June 5, 2025 at 5:13:05 PM U

Re: [blink-dev] Intent to Ship: WebGPU 'core-features-and-limits'

LGTM3 On Tuesday, June 10, 2025 at 11:13:19 AM UTC-4 Mike Taylor wrote: > LGTM2. > On 6/10/25 1:01 AM, Domenic Denicola wrote: > > LGTM1. > > To explain a bit of the API owners process, we aren't automatically > notified when you request reviews from other teams, so your Friday message > was p

Re: [EXTERNAL] Re: [blink-dev] Re: Intent to Ship: Web app scope extensions

LGTM3 On Wednesday, June 4, 2025 at 11:35:36 AM UTC-4 Chris Harrelson wrote: > LGTM2 > > On Tue, Jun 3, 2025 at 6:44 PM 'Daniel Clark' via blink-dev < > blink-dev@chromium.org> wrote: > >> Thanks! I don’t consider it blocking. LGTM1. >> >> >> >> *From:* 'Lu Huang' via blink-dev >> *Sent:* Tu

Re: [blink-dev] Intent to Ship: CSS env variable for OS-level font scale

LGTM3 On Fri, May 30, 2025 at 1:11 PM Philip Jägenstedt wrote: > LGTM2 > > Thank Philip and David for elaborating on the differences between mobile > and desktop platform that have led to this approach, and Domenic for your > summary of the situation. > > Thinking about the longer term, I think

Re: [EXTERNAL] Re: [blink-dev] Intent to Ship: On-device Web Speech API

LGTM1. Please update the TAG thread with the spec changes for posterity On Tuesday, May 27, 2025 at 7:18:44 PM UTC-4 ev...@google.com wrote: > Hi all, > > The spec changes have been merged and are live! > https://webaudio.github.io/web-speech-api/ > > I believe this should be ready for Blink owne

Re: [blink-dev] Intent to Ship: CSS sibling-index() and sibling-count()

Correction: LGTM2, because of Mike Taylor's approval above On Wednesday, May 21, 2025 at 12:34:48 PM UTC-4 Vladimir Levin wrote: > CSSWG resolved on this issue > https://github.com/w3c/csswg-drafts/issues/10982#issuecomment-2898572289 > I believe this aligns with option 2 i

Re: [blink-dev] Intent to Ship: CSS sibling-index() and sibling-count()

CSSWG resolved on this issue https://github.com/w3c/csswg-drafts/issues/10982#issuecomment-2898572289 I believe this aligns with option 2 in Yoav's reply. LGTM1 Thanks, Vlad On Wednesday, May 21, 2025 at 3:48:18 AM UTC-4 Rune Lillesveen wrote: > On Tue, May 20, 2025 at 1:38 PM Yoav Weiss (@Sho

[blink-dev] Re: Intent to Ship: CSS 'stretch' sizing keyword

LGTM2 On Wednesday, May 21, 2025 at 11:10:20 AM UTC-4 Alex Russell wrote: > Per David's last update in the Platform Status tool, LGTM1 > > On Wednesday, April 16, 2025 at 3:21:12 PM UTC-7 obr...@igalia.com wrote: > >> > I'm inclined to get things into the world >> >> I'm inclined to not hurry to

Re: [blink-dev] Re: Intent to Ship: Update QuotaExceededError to a DOMException derived interface

On Wednesday, May 14, 2025 at 8:53:30 PM UTC-4 Domenic Denicola wrote: On Thu, May 15, 2025 at 12:26 AM Vladimir Levin wrote: Hi, I'm looking at https://github.com/search?q=QuotaExceededError&type=code it seems like there are already classes with that name, which I believe shoul

Re: [blink-dev] Re: Intent to Ship: Update QuotaExceededError to a DOMException derived interface

Hi, I'm looking at https://github.com/search?q=QuotaExceededError&type=code it seems like there are already classes with that name, which I believe shouldn't be a problem. I do see some patterns that check explicitly for QuotaExceededError string and some examples handle that as a "success" as

[blink-dev] Re: Intent to Ship: Ignore Letter Spacing in Cursive Scripts

Have you investigated some sites that may be impacted by that? I think the rendering is certainly more correct for regular speech, but say one was labeling columns by letters with letter spacing. I feel like this would be negatively impacted by the change. I don't image that's common, but having

Re: [blink-dev] Intent to Ship: Align error type thrown for 'payment' WebAuthn credential creation: SecurityError => NotAllowedError

LGTM2 On Tuesday, April 15, 2025 at 9:26:02 PM UTC-4 Domenic Denicola wrote: > LGTM1 > > On Wed, Apr 16, 2025 at 12:47 AM Stephen Mcgruer > wrote: > >> Contact emailssmcgr...@chromium.org >> >> Explainerhttps://github.com/w3c/secure-payment-confirmation/issues/267 >> >> Specificationhttps://git

Re: [blink-dev] Intent to Ship: Add support for video frame orientation metadata to WebCodecs

On Wednesday, April 2, 2025 at 12:04:23 PM UTC-4 Dale Curtis wrote: On Wed, Apr 2, 2025 at 8:37 AM Vladimir Levin wrote: On Wednesday, April 2, 2025 at 12:05:53 AM UTC-4 Dale Curtis wrote: On Tue, Apr 1, 2025 at 7:16 PM Vladimir Levin wrote: Some cameras and media will immediately begin

Re: [blink-dev] Intent to Ship: Rename `string` attr() type to `raw-string`

Thank you for checking. LGTM1 On Thu, Mar 20, 2025 at 10:09 AM 'Munira Tursunova' via blink-dev < blink-dev@chromium.org> wrote: > Checked the websites with potential breakages, don't observe any > breakages. > The only website with visual differences is > https://css3test.com/#css-values-5, but

Re: [blink-dev] Intent to ship: Automatic beacon cross-origin data support (M135)

LGTM2. Thanks for clarifying. On Wednesday, April 2, 2025 at 10:58:54 AM UTC-4 lbr...@google.com wrote: > > There's a bit of an overloaded terminology that confuses me: when you > refer to a cross-origin subframe, are we talking about a cross-origin > fenced frame or an iframe? My recollection

Re: [blink-dev] Intent to Ship: Add support for video frame orientation metadata to WebCodecs

On Wednesday, April 2, 2025 at 12:05:53 AM UTC-4 Dale Curtis wrote: On Tue, Apr 1, 2025 at 7:16 PM Vladimir Levin wrote: Some cameras and media will immediately begin exposing orientation information. In uncommon cases this orientation may change. If orientation changes during encoding

Re: [blink-dev] Intent to Ship: Speculation rules: tag field

LGTM3 On Wednesday, April 2, 2025 at 11:21:08 AM UTC-4 Alex Russell wrote: > LGTM2, with some disappointment on two fronts: > > - why do we keep doing this these JSON-ish declarative forms without > adding any sort of DOM? It's maddening. > - we're backing into many things that effectively map

Re: [blink-dev] Intent to ship: Automatic beacon cross-origin data support (M135)

This does not change the privacy story nor does it introduce a privacy regression, as cross-origin subframes can currently postMessage() data to the root that the root frame can then use as automatic beacon data. Both the existing capability as well as the proposed changes involve the root fe

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

LGTM1 Interoperability risk is relatively low. The main risk is that other browsers do not implement the feature. However, since the feature is a small addition to an existing spec and it has consensus across browsers, it is possible that it will be implemented. There is no compatibility risk

[blink-dev] Re: Intent to Ship: Accept-Language Reduction (HTTP-only)

Can you file the various review gates as well? [image: Screenshot 2025-04-01 at 10.42.12 PM.png] TAG reviewTo be filed Is this accurate? -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "blink-dev" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails

Re: [blink-dev] Re: Intent to Ship: Auto-generated view transition names

be it. > > Best, > > Alex > > > On Tuesday, March 25, 2025 at 8:30:22 PM UTC-7 Vladimir Levin wrote: > >> On Tue, Mar 25, 2025 at 1:52 PM Mike Taylor >> wrote: >> >>> On 3/25/25 1:39 PM, Yoav Weiss (@Shopify) wrote: >>> >>> On Tu

Re: [blink-dev] Intent to Ship: Add support for video frame orientation metadata to WebCodecs

Some cameras and media will immediately begin exposing orientation information. In uncommon cases this orientation may change. If orientation changes during encoding through VideoEncoder frames with different orientation than the first are currently encoded with incorrect size and orientation

Re: [EXTERNAL] [blink-dev] Intent to Ship: Selection API getComposedRanges and direction

LGTM1 On Wednesday, March 26, 2025 at 5:38:45 PM UTC-4 Di Zhang wrote: > The WPT tests failing is mostly because Safari still using the old > specification for getComposedRanges() syntax. This change was resolved in > September 2024: https://github.com/w3c/selection-api/pull/331 > > I have open

Re: [blink-dev] Intent to Ship: Protected Audience (B&A): Support multiple sellers in navigator.getInterestGroupAdAuctionData

LGTM3 On Tuesday, April 1, 2025 at 3:51:41 PM UTC-4 beham...@google.com wrote: > Can I get an update on this? > > Thanks, > --Benjamin "Russ" Hamilton > > On Wed, Mar 26, 2025 at 12:56 PM Mike Taylor > wrote: > >> LGTM2 >> On 3/26/25 11:56 AM, 'Russ Hamilton' via blink-dev wrote: >> >> Yes, it'

[blink-dev] Intent to Ship: view-transition-name: auto

Contact emailsvmp...@chromium.org, nrosent...@chromium.org Explainer https://github.com/WICG/view-transitions/blob/main/auto-name-explainer.md Specificationhttps://drafts.csswg.org/css-view-transitions-2/#auto-vt-name Blink componentBlink>ViewTransitions

[blink-dev] Intent to Ship: view-transition-name: match-element

Contact emailsvmp...@chromium.org, nrosent...@chromium.org ExplainerNone Specificationhttps://drafts.csswg.org/css-view-transitions-2/#auto-vt-name Summary 'match-element' generates a unique id based on the element's identity and renames the same for this element. This is used in Single Page Ap

[blink-dev] Re: Intent to Ship: view-transition-name: match-element

On Mon, Mar 31, 2025 at 3:27 PM Vladimir Levin wrote: > Contact emailsvmp...@chromium.org, nrosent...@chromium.org > > ExplainerNone > The explainer is here: https://github.com/WICG/view-transitions/blob/main/auto-name-explainer.md > > > Specificationhttps://draf

[blink-dev] Re: I2P&S: Strict Same Origin Policy for Storage Access API

Is it a correct reading that that it's roughly 9% of 0.08% of pageloads that will be affected? That still seems large. Can you speak to the nature of the breakage? Specifically, do the sites that currently use it become unusable or is it a milder change from that? On the process side, do you mi

Re: [blink-dev] Re: Intent to Ship: Auto-generated view transition names

On Tue, Mar 25, 2025 at 1:52 PM Mike Taylor wrote: > On 3/25/25 1:39 PM, Yoav Weiss (@Shopify) wrote: > > On Tue, Mar 25, 2025 at 10:37 AM Vladimir Levin > wrote: > >> I'm not convinced this is a huge footgun. Yes, it's a convenience value >> that allows a

Re: [blink-dev] Re: Intent to Ship: Auto-generated view transition names

I'm not convinced this is a huge footgun. Yes, it's a convenience value that allows auto matching in MPA where there is no other way to automatically match without changes to the dom (for a custom attribute). Doing these modification is not far from just giving unique names to view-transition-name,

Re: [blink-dev] Re: Intent to Ship: Auto-generated view transition names

(feature author hat) I'd like to highlight that view-transition-name: auto does have a need in MPA, where match-element cannot match anything across different documents. I agree that the versioning problem that Jake mentioned exists in that case, but it seems similar to any other versioning proble

Re: [blink-dev] Intent to Deprecate and Remove: Deprecate special font size rules for H1 within some elements

t_size_for_h1 > > cheers, > > On Thu, Mar 20, 2025 at 12:37 AM Mason Freed wrote: > >> >> On Tue, Mar 18, 2025 at 7:25 PM Vladimir Levin >> wrote: >> >>> The thing that gives me pause is the nature of the console warning. It >>> isn'

Re: [blink-dev] Re: Intent to Experiment: Update of Canvas text rendering implementation

roll out the change via finch when you decide to ship. Thanks, Vlad On Wednesday, March 19, 2025 at 9:46:36 AM UTC-4 Stephen Chenney wrote: > On Wed, Mar 19, 2025 at 3:33 AM TAMURA, Kent wrote: > >> >> >> On Wed, Mar 19, 2025 at 11:47 AM Vladimir Levin >> wro

Re: [blink-dev] Intent to Ship: Unprefixed print-color-adjust

LGTM2 Is there really no Finch flag here, or is it just not recorded in the email? I'd recommend we have a flag as a risk mitigation. Thanks, Vlad On Tuesday, March 18, 2025 at 8:32:02 AM UTC-4 Mike Taylor wrote: > LGTM1 > On 3/17/25 8:55 PM, Chromestatus wrote: > > Contact emails chris...@chr

Re: [blink-dev] Intent to Ship: Update HTTP request headers, body, and referrer policy on CORS redirect

On Tuesday, March 18, 2025 at 11:38:32 AM UTC-4 Viktoria Zlatinova wrote: Contact emails vizla...@microsoft.com, toyos...@chromium.org, ba...@chromium.org Explainer None Specification https://fetch.spec.whatwg.org/#http-redirect-fetch Summary Update the HTTP request on CORS redirect by removi

[blink-dev] Re: Intent to Experiment: Update of Canvas text rendering implementation

I'm curious why you decided to do an origin trial instead of a more typical finch roll out + monitoring metrics for performance regressions. Origin trial data would limit us to the feedback of registered partners, which may not be a good representation of usage "in the wild". Separately, are y

Re: [blink-dev] Re: Intent to Ship: Call stacks in crash reports from unresponsive web pages

LGTM3 On Tuesday, March 18, 2025 at 8:47:30 AM UTC-4 Mike Taylor wrote: > LGTM2 - I see that Mozilla has proposed a positive position via comment. > On 3/17/25 2:25 PM, 'Dan Clark' via blink-dev wrote: > > LGTM1 > > On Monday, March 17, 2025 at 11:24:06 AM UTC-7 sligh...@chromium.org > wrote: >

Re: [blink-dev] Intent to Deprecate and Remove: Deprecate special font size rules for H1 within some elements

e only true test is to use Finch and > slowly/carefully test a removal. Once that process is successful, we would > disable it by default in code for all browsers. > > Thanks, > Mason > > > >> Best, >> >> Alex >> >> On Thursday, March 6,

Re: [blink-dev] Intent to Ship: Update ProgressEvent to use double type for 'loaded' and 'total'

LGTM2 On Wed, Mar 5, 2025 at 9:36 AM Daniel Bratell wrote: > LGTM1 > > (I'm a bit worried that it won't be interoperable between browsers but > since it's so easy to implement, and since other browsers have said they > are on top of it, I think it will be fine) > > /Daniel > On 2025-02-27 06:18,

[blink-dev] Re: Intent to Ship: PaymentRequest on WebView

I believe this was the intent for non-WebView PaymentRequest: https://groups.google.com/a/chromium.org/g/blink-dev/c/p1DYoxHlkKg/m/rBqBMGbFCgAJ LGTM1 to ship to WebView as well with the restriction you outlined. Please also start the rest of the reviews (WP Security, Enterprise, Testing). O

Re: [blink-dev] Intent to Deprecate and Remove: Deprecate special font size rules for H1 within some elements

Re TAG: I don't believe we need a TAG review for deprecations or removals. On Tuesday, March 4, 2025 at 8:54:00 PM UTC-5 Domenic Denicola wrote: Thanks very much Mason (and Jason). It wasn't clear to me that this was just in the initial "deprecate" stage, not the "remove" stage: I wish Chrome

[blink-dev] Re: Intent to Ship: Language support for CanvasTextDrawingStyles

On Tuesday, March 4, 2025 at 11:17:42 AM UTC-5 Chromestatus wrote: Contact emails schen...@chromium.org Explainer https://github.com/whatwg/html/pull/10873 Specification https://github.com/whatwg/html/pull/10873 Summary The DOM element, like all DOM elements, accepts a `lang` attribute

Re: [blink-dev] Intent to Deprecate and Remote: navigateEvent.transitionWhile()

On Wed, Feb 26, 2025 at 11:32 AM Chris Harrelson wrote: > > > On Tue, Feb 25, 2025 at 11:16 PM Domenic Denicola > wrote: > >> Hi all, >> >> I randomly discovered today that we forgot to remove one property as part >> of this deprecation and removal. We successfully removed NavigateEvent's >> tra

Re: [blink-dev] Re: Intent to Ship: Invoker Commands; the command and commandfor attributes

LGTM3 On Wednesday, February 19, 2025 at 11:09:57 AM UTC-5 Chris Harrelson wrote: > LGTM2 > > On Wed, Feb 19, 2025 at 4:33 AM Yoav Weiss (@Shopify) < > yoavwe...@chromium.org> wrote: > >> LGTM1 conditional on landing the PR >> >> >> >> On Monday, February 17, 2025 at 11:25:03 PM UTC+1 Chromestatu

Re: [blink-dev] Intent To Ship: Allow SameSite=None Cookies in First-Party Sandboxed Contexts

LGTM3 On Wednesday, February 19, 2025 at 11:29:50 AM UTC-5 Chris Harrelson wrote: > LGTM2 > > On Wed, Feb 19, 2025 at 8:28 AM Alex Russell > wrote: > >> LGTM1; thanks for making sure to follow up on the spec PRs. >> >> On Thursday, February 13, 2025 at 6:44:27 AM UTC-8 joha...@google.com >> wr

Re: [blink-dev] Intent To Ship: Allow SameSite=None Cookies in First-Party Sandboxed Contexts

Hey, Do you mind starting all of the relevant reviews for this as well? [image: chipsna.png] Thanks, Vlad On Wed, Feb 12, 2025 at 9:09 AM 'Anusha Muley' via blink-dev < blink-dev@chromium.org> wrote: > Contact emails > > anushamu...@chromium.org, dylancut...@chromium.org > > Explainer > > > htt

Re: [blink-dev] Intent to Ship: Custom data origin in sharedStorage.createWorklet

LGTM3 On Wed, Feb 5, 2025 at 11:16 AM Mike Taylor wrote: > LGTM2 > On 2/5/25 11:15 AM, Chris Harrelson wrote: > > LGTM1 > > On Wed, Jan 29, 2025 at 1:08 PM Josh Karlin wrote: > >> Contact emails cam...@chromium.org, yao...@chromium.org, >> jkar...@chromium.org, saraak...@google.com >> >> Explai

Re: [blink-dev] Intent to Prototype & Ship: safe-area-max-inset-* variables

observable. >>> >>> On Monday, February 3, 2025 at 10:49:51 AM UTC-5 Robert Flack wrote: >>>> >>>>> FYI in the spec issue we thought that safe-area-max-inset-* would be >>>>> better to ensure that it appears next to the safe-area-inset-*

[blink-dev] Intent to Prototype & Ship: safe-area-max-inset-* variables

Contact emailsvmp...@chromium.org, sko...@chromium.org ExplainerThis proposal builds upon the safe-area-inset variables specified here https://drafts.csswg.org/css-env-1/#safe-area-insets. The safe-area-inset variables can dynamically change based on the device, which can require relayout or in so

Re: [blink-dev] Intent to ship: Customizable select

LGTM3 On Thu, Jan 30, 2025 at 10:08 AM Daniel Bratell wrote: > LGTM2 > > Good luck with the launch! I hope the others follow quickly. (No official > signals from them but they have had plenty of time and opportunities to > object and with your answers I'm confident that this can become > interop

Re: [blink-dev] Intent to Ship: Protected Audience: Private Aggregation per-participant usage metrics

LGTM1 On Tuesday, January 21, 2025 at 12:59:08 PM UTC-5 morl...@google.com wrote: > So for explainer it's > https://github.com/WICG/turtledove/blob/main/FLEDGE_extended_PA_reporting.md#per-participant-metrics > > For the spec, it's not really a separate section. Most relevant is > handling of r

Re: [blink-dev] Re: Intent to Ship: Permissions Policy reports for iframes

LGTM2. I think this is a useful improvement over permission policy violation reporting On Tuesday, January 28, 2025 at 10:15:57 AM UTC-5 Mike Taylor wrote: > LGTM1 > On 1/27/25 6:27 PM, 'Jun Kokatsu' via blink-dev wrote: > > On Sunday, January 26, 2025 at 6:45:39 PM UTC-8 Domenic Denicola wrote:

Re: [blink-dev] Re: Intent to Ship: OffscreenCanvas getContextAttributes

LGTM3 On Wednesday, January 22, 2025 at 10:35:17 AM UTC-5 Daniel Bratell wrote: > LGTM2 > > /Daniel > On 2025-01-22 15:58, Yoav Weiss (@Shopify) wrote: > > LGTM1 > > On Tuesday, January 21, 2025 at 12:09:45 PM UTC+1 ccameron chromium wrote: > >> *Contact emails* >> ccame...@chromium.org >> >> *Ex

Re: [blink-dev] Intent to Ship: Dialog light dismiss

LGTM2 I think this is an extremely useful attribute, so I don't doubt that web developers signal is strongly positive, but is there any evidence you can point to? Thanks, Vlad On Wed, Jan 22, 2025 at 6:39 AM Mike Taylor wrote: > LGTM1 > On 1/15/25 5:57 PM, Mason Freed wrote: > > Contact emails

Re: [blink-dev] Intent to Ship: Protected Audience (B&A) - Private Aggregation & downsampling forDebuggingOnly reporting

LGTM3 On Fri, Jan 17, 2025 at 3:51 PM Chris Harrelson wrote: > LGTM2 > > On Fri, Jan 17, 2025 at 10:15 AM Mike Taylor > wrote: > >> I see the WPTs have all landed now, thanks. >> >> LGTM1 >> On 1/16/25 2:16 PM, Qingxin Wu wrote: >> >> https://crrev.com/c/6179638 is the CL that's work in progres

Re: [blink-dev] Re: Intent to Ship: Protected Audience: Trusted Key-Value Server Support

LGTM2 On Fri, Jan 17, 2025 at 2:47 PM Chris Harrelson wrote: > LGTM1 > > On Fri, Jan 17, 2025 at 11:27 AM Paul Jensen > wrote: > >> Before starting the IETF spec, we reached out to IETF Area Directors for >> the ART and WIT groups and they advised us to draft the internet drafts for >> this pro

Re: [blink-dev] Intent to Ship: Freezing on Energy Saver

page that wants to > run in the background. I didn't see it listed here. The other use case that > has been mentioned in similar threads is stock market applications which > seem to both want to run in the background and do non-trivial work of some > kind. > > As for possible pit

Re: [blink-dev] Intent to Ship: CSS advanced attr() function

king change >> risk? I think we all expect that the risk is low, but is it extremely low >> and so something we should just launch with a finch killswitch ready to use >> at the first sign of issue, or is it only very low meaning we need to go >> further - especially for o

Re: [blink-dev] Intent to Ship: Document-Policy: expect-no-linked-resources

Hey, We discussed this at API Owners today: 1. As Stephen mentioned, it would be nice if there was more support for this feature. Do you have partners or developers that are aware of this and are looking forward to using the feature? 2. In terms of approving this feature, we typically want the s

Re: [blink-dev] Intent to Deprecate and Remove: Protected Audience Subresource bundle directFromSellerSignals

LGTM3 On Wednesday, December 11, 2024 at 11:17:36 AM UTC-5 Rick Byers wrote: > I double-checked internal metrics and usage is indeed effectively zero, so > compat risk should be effectively non-existent. > > LGTM2 to remove directly with just the usual kill switch in case of > emergency someho

Re: [blink-dev] Intent to Ship: Protected Audience Bidding and Auction Services: Allow trusted bidding signals to trigger interest group updates

the connection to the Key-Value server). > > Best, > --Benjamin "Russ" Hamilton > > On Tue, Dec 3, 2024 at 8:38 PM Vladimir Levin wrote: > >> >> >> On Tue, Nov 26, 2024 at 6:42 PM Mike Taylor >> wrote: >> >>> Could you please request the v

Re: [blink-dev] Intent to Ship: Freezing on Energy Saver

You've mentioned things like mail/calendar should still work. Is this because the expected background CPU usage is low or is it that it's using some API that directly opts it out of the freezing behavior? I'm particularly worried about things like calendar that don't _typically_ need to do any work

Re: [blink-dev] Intent to Ship: CSS advanced attr() function

On Mon, Dec 2, 2024 at 10:47 PM Domenic Denicola wrote: > Thank you, that explainer is very helpful! > > I notice that we're failing all the tests on > https://wpt.fyi/results/css/css-values?label=master&label=experimental&aligned&q=attr > , probably because this feature is not available behind t

Re: [blink-dev] Intent to Ship: Protected Audience: Auction Nonce Hardening

On Mon, Nov 25, 2024 at 9:15 AM 'Orr Bernstein' via blink-dev < blink-dev@chromium.org> wrote: > Contact emails > > o...@google.com, pauljen...@chromium.org, carai...@chromium.org > > > Explainer > > https://github.com/WICG/turtledove/pull/1322 > > > Specification > > https://github.com/WICG/turtl

Re: [blink-dev] Intent to Ship: Protected Audience Bidding and Auction Services: Allow trusted bidding signals to trigger interest group updates

On Tue, Nov 26, 2024 at 6:42 PM Mike Taylor wrote: > Could you please request the various review bits in your chromestatus > entry? > On 11/22/24 3:45 PM, 'Russ Hamilton' via blink-dev wrote: > > Contact emails > > pauljen...@chromium.org, behamil...@google.com > > Explainer > > For the Protected

Re: [blink-dev] Intent to Ship: Web Authentication API: PublicKeyCredential’s getClientCapabilities() method

LGTM3 On Wed, Nov 27, 2024 at 10:59 AM Chris Harrelson wrote: > LGTM2 > > On Fri, Nov 22, 2024 at 12:35 PM Mike Taylor > wrote: > >> Thanks Andrii - I see that Mozilla is positive on the feature now, thanks >> for requesting the review. >> >> And to Alex's request to call out FP risk - the spec

Re: [blink-dev] Intent to Ship: Expose attributionsrc attribute on

On Tue, Dec 3, 2024 at 10:34 AM Stephen Chenney wrote: > > > On Mon, Dec 2, 2024 at 11:38 AM Andrew Paseltiner < > apaselti...@chromium.org> wrote: > >> On Thu, Nov 21, 2024 at 9:50 PM Domenic Denicola >> wrote: >> >>> With my HTML editor hat on, I support keeping parity between and >>> . Altho

Re: [blink-dev] Intent to Deprecate and Remove: Remove WebGPU limit maxInterStageShaderComponents

Would the libraries using maxInterStageShaderComponents (from Mike's github link) "break" when accessed? I'm guessing since nobody seems to be calling them, it should be fine and 2 milestones should be enough to find deprecation warnings. LGTM3 On Thu, Nov 21, 2024 at 12:16 PM Mike Taylor wrote:

Re: [blink-dev] Intent to Ship: FedCM authorization features (fka Bundle 6: Continuation API, Parameters API, Fields API, Multiple configURLs, Custom account labels)

Thank you for the explanation! LGTM1 On Mon, Nov 25, 2024, 1:53 p.m. Christian Biesinger wrote: > > > On Mon, Nov 25, 2024 at 12:47 PM Vladimir Levin > wrote: > >> Hey Christian, >> >> Thank you for your reply. Additional questions below. >> >&

Re: [blink-dev] Intent to Ship: FedCM authorization features (fka Bundle 6: Continuation API, Parameters API, Fields API, Multiple configURLs, Custom account labels)

summarized the OT feedback in the initial email under "Link to > origin trial feedback summary". > > Thanks, > Christian > > On Fri, Nov 22, 2024 at 3:12 PM Vladimir Levin > wrote: > >> Hey, >> >> Looking over the first three APIs (Continuation AP

Re: [blink-dev] Intent to Ship: Popover nested inside invoker shouldn't re-invoke it

This seems like a small spec change to avoid an edge case. I suspect, as you also point out, that this should have been at most a PSA. Because of this, I don't think we need TAG, explainer, and other items that would've otherwise been required. LGTM1 Thanks! Vlad On Fri, Nov 22, 2024 at 1:27 PM

Re: [blink-dev] Intent to Ship: FedCM authorization features (fka Bundle 6: Continuation API, Parameters API, Fields API, Multiple configURLs, Custom account labels)

Hey, Looking over the first three APIs (Continuation API, Parameters API, Fields API), I understand how it solves the problem of asking for additional data from IdPs. Essentially (and please correct me if I'm wrong), RPs specify a list of fields (i.e. scopes), then the browser chooses whether to m

Re: [blink-dev] Intent to Ship: Attribution Reporting Feature: Remove ar_debug Requirement

LGTM2 On Thu, Nov 7, 2024 at 5:20 PM 'Akash Nadan' via blink-dev < blink-dev@chromium.org> wrote: > Hi Mike, > > I have updated the chromestatus entry to reflect this. > > Thanks, > Akash > > On Thursday, November 7, 2024 at 2:18:33 PM UTC-8 Mike Taylor wrote: > >> Thank you - can you please upda

Re: [blink-dev] Intent to Ship: Remove Prefixed HTMLVideoElement Fullscreen APIs

LGTM3 On Wed, Nov 6, 2024 at 3:20 PM Mike Taylor wrote: > LGTM2 > On 11/6/24 2:43 PM, Chris Harrelson wrote: > > Thanks! > > LGTM1 > > On Wed, Nov 6, 2024 at 11:42 AM 'Thomas Guilbert' via blink-dev < > blink-dev@chromium.org> wrote: > >> >> >> On Wed, Nov 6, 2024 at 7:28 AM Yoav Weiss (@Shopify

Re: [blink-dev] Intent to Prototype & Ship: Private State Token API Permissions Policy Default Allowlist Wildcard

LGTM3 On Wed, Nov 6, 2024 at 11:05 AM Yoav Weiss (@Shopify) < yoavwe...@chromium.org> wrote: > LGTM2 > > At the API owner meeting, Jeffrey explained to me that the issuers are > controlled by the top-level, so I'm comfortable with the model (and the > fact that ad providers won't fight for the 2

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

LGTM3 On Wed, Nov 6, 2024 at 10:21 AM Yoav Weiss (@Shopify) < yoavwe...@chromium.org> wrote: > LGTM2 > > On Wednesday, October 30, 2024 at 3:13:13 PM UTC+1 Orr Bernstein wrote: > >> Previously we had buyerAndSellerReportingId and buyerReportingId to allow >> buyers and sellers to report informati

Re: [blink-dev] Re: Intent to Ship: Sideways writing modes

LGTM3 On Wed, Oct 23, 2024 at 11:27 AM Yoav Weiss (@Shopify) < yoavwe...@chromium.org> wrote: > LGTM2 > > On Wednesday, October 23, 2024 at 8:26:40 AM UTC-7 Alex Russell wrote: > >> LGTM1 >> >> On Sunday, October 20, 2024 at 6:29:32 PM UTC-7 Kent Tamura wrote: >> >>> Contact emailstk...@chromium.

Re: [blink-dev] Intent to Ship: Dialog Toggle Events

LGTM3 On Wed, Oct 23, 2024 at 11:22 AM Alex Russell wrote: > Thanks for sending the FYI. LGTM2 > > On Wednesday, October 23, 2024 at 8:19:46 AM UTC-7 Yoav Weiss wrote: > >> LGTM1 >> >> Thanks for catching us up here! :) >> >> On Thursday, October 17, 2024 at 1:25:25 AM UTC-7 Keith Cirkel wrote:

Re: [blink-dev] Re: Intent to Ship: CSS Anchor Positioning: allow anchor-size() in inset and margin Properties

LGTM1. I think this is a straightforward improvement to the feature set. On Fri, Oct 11, 2024 at 3:34 PM Rune Lillesveen wrote: > On Fri, Oct 11, 2024 at 8:30 PM Alex Russell > wrote: > >> Hey Rune, >> >> It's surprising that there aren't any developer signals given that we're >> going first an

Re: [blink-dev] Intent to Ship: Select parser relaxation

LGTM3 On Fri, Oct 11, 2024 at 3:12 PM Chris Harrelson wrote: > LGTM2 > > I think it makes sense at this point to start finching/turning on this API > freely on the stable channel, in order to inform the final spec > language and landed PR. This is also the main risk factor identified in the > Mo

Re: [blink-dev] Intent to Ship: Exempt Speculation-Rules Header from CSP restrictions

LGTM3 On Wed, Oct 9, 2024 at 10:30 AM Mike Taylor wrote: > Got it, thanks for confirming Domenic. > > LGTM2 > On 10/9/24 2:10 AM, Yoav Weiss (@Shopify) wrote: > > LGTM1 > > I agree that this is a web-exposed bug fix, and that the likelihood of > negative impact here at this stage of the feature'

Re: [blink-dev] Re: Intent to ship: WebGPU: GPUCanvasContext getConfiguration()

LGTM3 On Tue, Oct 8, 2024 at 10:38 AM Chris Harrelson wrote: > LGTM2 > > On Tue, Oct 8, 2024 at 12:06 AM Yoav Weiss (@Shopify) < > yoavwe...@chromium.org> wrote: > >> LGTM1 (from the right account) >> >> On Wednesday, October 2, 2024 at 6:51:28 AM UTC+2 François Beaufort wrote: >> >>> Contact em

Re: [blink-dev] Intent to Ship: Private Aggregation API: increase contribution limit to 100 for Protected Audience callers

LGTM2 On Sat, Oct 5, 2024 at 7:47 AM Yoav Weiss (@Shopify) wrote: > LGTM1 > > On Fri, Oct 4, 2024 at 8:48 PM Dan McArdle wrote: > >> No, the reporting endpoint can’t infer the number of null contributions. >> Critically, the browser pads the payload before encrypting it with the >> Aggregation

Re: [blink-dev] Intent to Ship: SVG foreignObject does not taint the canvas for blob URLs

On Thu, Sep 19, 2024 at 9:48 PM Stephen Chenney wrote: > Reply to the spec concerns inline ... > > On Thu, Sep 19, 2024 at 12:15 AM Domenic Denicola > wrote: > >> Seems like a good idea! >> >> On Thu, Sep 19, 2024 at 4:55 AM Chromestatus < >> ad...@cr-status.appspotmail.com> wrote: >> >>> Contac

Re: [blink-dev] Intent to Ship: WebGPU: Clip Distances

Hey, Do you mind filing the reviews for other chips: [image: cs.png] Thanks! Vlad On Mon, Sep 23, 2024 at 11:07 PM Shao, Jiawei wrote: > *Contact emails* > > jiawei.s...@intel.com > > > *Explainer* > > The “clip-distances” GPU feature adds the WGSL built-in variable > @builtin(clip_distances)

  1   2   3   >