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

Could you flip the required review bits in the chromestatus tool? On Monday, September 9, 2024 at 2:58:19 PM UTC+2 Ari Chivukula wrote: > Contact emails > > aric...@chromium.org, kaustub...@chromium.org, sval...@chromium.org, > ayk...@google.com, nick...@google.com > > Specification > > https://

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

Done I think? ~ Ari Chivukula (Their/There/They're) On Wed, Sep 11, 2024 at 8:32 AM Yoav Weiss (@Shopify) < yoavwe...@chromium.org> wrote: > Could you flip the required review bits in the chromestatus tool? > > On Monday, September 9, 2024 at 2:58:19 PM UTC+2 Ari Chivukula wrote: > >> Contact e

Re: [blink-dev] Intent to Ship: @property support syntax

On Tuesday, September 10, 2024 at 5:08:33 PM UTC+2 Mike Taylor wrote: LGTM1 On 9/5/24 8:40 AM, 'Munira Tursunova' via blink-dev wrote: This is also the case for registerProperty(), right? Right, thanks! On Thu, Sep 5, 2024 at 2:20 PM Rune Lillesveen wrote: On Thu, Sep 5, 2024 at 1:44 PM Ch

Re: [blink-dev] Intent to Ship: Add bugfix version number to User-Agent string on Bling

LGTM On Wed, Aug 28, 2024 at 9:53 PM Janice Liu wrote: > Contact emails > > janice...@chromium.org, miketa...@chromium.org > > Explainer > > None. This is a minor change. > > Specification > > https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc9110#field.user-agent > > Summary > > User Agent (UA) strings in Chro

[blink-dev] Re: Intent to Experiment: Incorporating navigation initiator into the HTTP cache partition key

I'd love to better understand the attack scenario. On Friday, September 6, 2024 at 5:40:55 AM UTC+2 Andrew Williams wrote: Contact emails miketa...@chromium.org, awil...@chromium.org Explainer None yet. Specification https://fetch.spec.whatwg.org/#http-cache-partitions Summary We aim to ex

Re: [blink-dev] Intent to Ship: @property support syntax

Latest published version doesn't include as a valid syntax for custom property registration: ( https://www.w3.org/TR/css-properties-values-api-1/#supported-names), but I also found a PR with the spec change that adds syntax support for registered custom properties ( https://github.com/w3c/css-hou

Re: [blink-dev] Intent to Ship: @property support syntax

The server seems to be working now, FWIW. On 9/11/24 9:31 AM, Munira Tursunova wrote: Latest published version doesn't include as a valid syntax for custom property registration: (https://www.w3.org/TR/css-properties-values-api-1/#supported-names), but I also found a PR with the spec change t

Re: [blink-dev] Intent to Experiment: FedCM as a trust signal for the Storage Access API

Hello again - we'd like to request another OT extension, through M130 inclusive. As a demonstration of progress, we have: - Opened a spec PR - Requested formal position signals from Firefox

[blink-dev] Where are the expectations impacting the canvas_webgpu_transfer layout tests?

Hi folks, I'm running wpt_internal/webgpu/canvas_webgpu_transfer/transferBackFromGPUTexture-canvas-readback-rgba16f.https.html on Mac: third_party/blink/tools/run_web_tests.py -t mac_release wpt_internal/webgpu/canvas_webgpu_transfer/transferBackFromGPUTexture-canvas-readback-rgba16f.https.html -

Re: [blink-dev] Where are the expectations impacting the canvas_webgpu_transfer layout tests?

On Wed, Sep 11, 2024 at 4:34 PM Colin Blundell wrote: > Hi folks, > > I'm running > wpt_internal/webgpu/canvas_webgpu_transfer/transferBackFromGPUTexture-canvas-readback-rgba16f.https.html > on Mac: > > third_party/blink/tools/run_web_tests.py -t mac_release > wpt_internal/webgpu/canvas_webgpu_tr

Re: [blink-dev] Intent to Ship: Dynamic safe area insets

My only concern with the current feature is that dynamically updating the safe area while scrolling requires a main thread update for the developer drawn controls (e.g. footer) to respond. This is going to be slow. Hopefully there is a path by which we can recognize this positioning and update it f

Re: [blink-dev] Where are the expectations impacting the canvas_webgpu_transfer layout tests?

On Wed, Sep 11, 2024 at 4:41 PM Fredrik Söderquist wrote: > On Wed, Sep 11, 2024 at 4:34 PM Colin Blundell > wrote: > >> Hi folks, >> >> I'm running >> wpt_internal/webgpu/canvas_webgpu_transfer/transferBackFromGPUTexture-canvas-readback-rgba16f.https.html >> on Mac: >> >> third_party/blink/tool

Re: [blink-dev] Intent to Ship: @property support syntax

LGTM2 I note that WebKit just very recently landed this so I don't know if it's in production yet. /Daniel On 2024-09-11 15:37, Mike Taylor wrote: The server seems to be working now, FWIW. On 9/11/24 9:31 AM, Munira Tursunova wrote: Latest published version doesn't include as a valid synt

Re: [blink-dev] Intent to Deprecate and Remove: Remove non-standard GPUAdapter requestAdapterInfo() method

It's a bit scary, but given the analysis, the risk seems contained. You listed None as Finch flag though. I think it's policy, and prudent, to make changes like this protected by a flag so that it can be undone if we're wrong. /Daniel On 2024-09-10 14:09, Yoav Weiss (@Shopify) wrote: OK, LGT

Re: [blink-dev] Intent to Deprecate and Remove: Remove non-standard GPUAdapter requestAdapterInfo() method

Good point Daniel! I'll go update the chrome status entry. Here's how we'll proceed: 1. We'll deprecate the method with `DeprecateAs` in the IDL file 2. Then we'll add a blink runtime feature off by default that hides the method with `RuntimeEnabled` to remove it 3. And finally we can remove it com

Re: [blink-dev] Where are the expectations impacting the canvas_webgpu_transfer layout tests?

On Wed, Sep 11, 2024 at 4:43 PM Colin Blundell wrote: > > > On Wed, Sep 11, 2024 at 4:41 PM Fredrik Söderquist wrote: > >> On Wed, Sep 11, 2024 at 4:34 PM Colin Blundell >> wrote: >> >>> Hi folks, >>> >>> I'm running >>> wpt_internal/webgpu/canvas_webgpu_transfer/transferBackFromGPUTexture-canv

Re: [blink-dev] Intent to Ship: Dynamic safe area insets

Thank you for the feedback Robert! > updating the safe area while scrolling requires a main thread update for the developer drawn controls (e.g. footer) to respond I've attached a recording of the same feature's behavior on iOS

Re: [blink-dev] Where are the expectations impacting the canvas_webgpu_transfer layout tests?

On Wed, Sep 11, 2024 at 5:06 PM Fredrik Söderquist wrote: > On Wed, Sep 11, 2024 at 4:43 PM Colin Blundell > wrote: > >> >> >> On Wed, Sep 11, 2024 at 4:41 PM Fredrik Söderquist wrote: >> >>> On Wed, Sep 11, 2024 at 4:34 PM Colin Blundell >>> wrote: >>> Hi folks, I'm running >>>

[blink-dev] Intent to Ship: CSS font-variant-emoji

Contact emailsmoon...@google.com ExplainerNone Specificationhttps://www.w3.org/TR/css-fonts-4/#font-variant-emoji-prop Design docs https://docs.google.com/document/d/1NyIKm0PnWUwX6j0smDwxDAPSUoiyBHPL95oH2lvjjpc/edit?usp=sharing&resourcekey=0-ubYsGJCgRSQnT9i_guM64g Summary Font-variant-emoji CS

Re: [blink-dev] Intent to Experiment: FedCM as a trust signal for the Storage Access API

Hi Chris, Sounds like good progress, thanks. Could you also tell us the reasons you need to continue experimenting? On Wed, Sep 11, 2024 at 6:43 AM Chris Fredrickson wrote: > Hello again - we'd like to request another OT extension, through M130 > inclusive. As a demonstration of progress, we ha

Re: [blink-dev] Intent to Ship: @property support syntax

LGTM3 On Wed, Sep 11, 2024 at 7:44 AM Daniel Bratell wrote: > LGTM2 > > I note that WebKit just very recently landed this so I don't know if it's > in production yet. > > /Daniel > On 2024-09-11 15:37, Mike Taylor wrote: > > The server seems to be working now, FWIW. > On 9/11/24 9:31 AM, Munira

Re: [blink-dev] Intent to Experiment: Reduce Accept-Language

LGTM to experiment in M128-131 inclusive. /Daniel On 2024-09-09 18:58, Victor Tan wrote: Hey Alex (and others), Here’s a few questions we asked ourselves to hopefully answer questions you or others might have, in order to feel comfortable with moving forward with this experiment: 1.

[blink-dev] Re: Intent to Ship: allow more pseudo-elements and pseudo-classes after ::part()

LGTM2 On Wednesday, September 4, 2024 at 7:39:25 PM UTC-7 Domenic Denicola wrote: > Thank you so much for those detailed writeups. LGTM1; it's clear this is > future-extensible and you've carefully considered the tradeoffs. > > On Wed, Sep 4, 2024 at 11:30 PM David Baron wrote: > >> On Tue, Sep

Re: [blink-dev] Re: Intent to Ship: allow more pseudo-elements and pseudo-classes after ::part()

LGTM3 /Daniel On 2024-09-11 17:39, Alex Russell wrote: LGTM2 On Wednesday, September 4, 2024 at 7:39:25 PM UTC-7 Domenic Denicola wrote: Thank you so much for those detailed writeups. LGTM1; it's clear this is future-extensible and you've carefully considered the tradeoffs.

Re: [blink-dev] Intent to Ship: Add bugfix version number to User-Agent string on Bling

That's LGTM1 On Wed, Sep 11, 2024 at 3:09 PM Yoav Weiss (@Shopify) < yoavwe...@chromium.org> wrote: > LGTM > > On Wed, Aug 28, 2024 at 9:53 PM Janice Liu wrote: > >> Contact emails >> >> janice...@chromium.org, miketa...@chromium.org >> >> Explainer >> >> None. This is a minor change. >> >> Spec

Re: [blink-dev] Intent to Ship: Add bugfix version number to User-Agent string on Bling

LGTM2, and as someone who has been a sceptic of UA freezing in general (rather than reducing entropy for very old versions), it's good to see this kind of flexibility. On Wednesday, September 11, 2024 at 8:47:48 AM UTC-7 Yoav Weiss wrote: > That's LGTM1 > > On Wed, Sep 11, 2024 at 3:09 PM Yoav

Re: [blink-dev] Intent to Ship: Add bugfix version number to User-Agent string on Bling

LGTM3 On Wed, Sep 11, 2024 at 11:50 AM Alex Russell wrote: > LGTM2, and as someone who has been a sceptic of UA freezing in general > (rather than reducing entropy for very old versions), it's good to see this > kind of flexibility. > > On Wednesday, September 11, 2024 at 8:47:48 AM UTC-7 Yoav W

[blink-dev] Re: Intent to Experiment: Incorporating navigation initiator into the HTTP cache partition key

Per today's API OWNERS conversation, I understand that this experiment is going to collect data for presenting potential changes to the behaviour. Assuming that's right, LGTM1. Best, Alex On Wednesday, September 11, 2024 at 6:17:26 AM UTC-7 Yoav Weiss wrote: > I'd love to better understand th

Re: [blink-dev] Where are the expectations impacting the canvas_webgpu_transfer layout tests?

On Wed, Sep 11, 2024 at 5:16 PM Colin Blundell wrote: > > > On Wed, Sep 11, 2024 at 5:06 PM Fredrik Söderquist wrote: > >> On Wed, Sep 11, 2024 at 4:43 PM Colin Blundell >> wrote: >> >>> >>> >>> On Wed, Sep 11, 2024 at 4:41 PM Fredrik Söderquist wrote: >>> On Wed, Sep 11, 2024 at 4:34 PM

Re: [blink-dev] Intent to Deprecate and Remove: Remove non-standard GPUAdapter requestAdapterInfo() method

LGTM3 On Wednesday, September 11, 2024 at 8:04:22 AM UTC-7 fbea...@google.com wrote: > Good point Daniel! I'll go update the chrome status entry. > Here's how we'll proceed: > 1. We'll deprecate the method with `DeprecateAs` in the IDL file > 2. Then we'll add a blink runtime feature off by defa

Re: [blink-dev] Intent to Ship: Capture all screens

LGTM1 On Tuesday, September 10, 2024 at 3:36:50 PM UTC-7 Reilly Grant wrote: > LGTM as an IWA OWNER (3x LGTM from Blink API OWNERS are still required > according to the IWA-specific API launch process > ). > > This feature ha

Re: [blink-dev] Intent to Ship: Capture all screens

LGTM2 On Wed, Sep 11, 2024 at 12:00 PM Alex Russell wrote: > LGTM1 > > On Tuesday, September 10, 2024 at 3:36:50 PM UTC-7 Reilly Grant wrote: > >> LGTM as an IWA OWNER (3x LGTM from Blink API OWNERS are still required >> according to the IWA-specific API launch process >>

Re: [blink-dev] Intent to Deprecate and Remove: Remove non-standard GPUAdapter requestAdapterInfo() method

Bonus LGTM4 /Daniel On 2024-09-11 17:58, Alex Russell wrote: LGTM3 On Wednesday, September 11, 2024 at 8:04:22 AM UTC-7 fbea...@google.com wrote: Good point Daniel! I'll go update the chrome status entry. Here's how we'll proceed: 1. We'll deprecate the method with `DeprecateAs`

Re: [blink-dev] Intent to Ship: Direct Sockets API

LGTM3 for the IWAs in its current form where it is limited to enterprise customers. This and features similar to this would need to be revisited if IWAs shift to a more public audience. If and when that happens, it would be nice to understand the vetting / review process to judge whether some of th

Re: [blink-dev] Where are the expectations impacting the canvas_webgpu_transfer layout tests?

On Wed, Sep 11, 2024 at 5:58 PM Fredrik Söderquist wrote: > On Wed, Sep 11, 2024 at 5:16 PM Colin Blundell > wrote: > >> >> >> On Wed, Sep 11, 2024 at 5:06 PM Fredrik Söderquist wrote: >> >>> On Wed, Sep 11, 2024 at 4:43 PM Colin Blundell >>> wrote: >>> On Wed, Sep 11, 2024 at 4

Re: [blink-dev] Intent to Experiment: FedCM as a trust signal for the Storage Access API

It's not exactly for experimentation, technically. My understanding is that we need to have a verdict from the TAG review before we send an I2S, but I don't think it's realistic to expect one before M130 branch cut (9/16/23). (I also need to go through I2S pre-review and launch bug approval befo

[blink-dev] Intent to Ship: WebXr hand input module - Level 1

Contact emailsalcoo...@chromium.org Explainer https://github.com/immersive-web/webxr-hand-input/blob/main/explainer.md Specificationhttps://immersive-web.github.io/webxr-hand-input Summary Exposes hand joint data on XrInputSources for use during a WebXr session. This allows developers to have m

Re: [blink-dev] Intent to Experiment: FedCM as a trust signal for the Storage Access API

Hey Chris, A few thoughts: We do not block shipping features if TAG is slow with their responses. But that said, I see the TAG review was requested just 20 hours ago - we do like to give them a reasonable amount of time to respond (this is usually on the order of a few weeks, maybe longer if

Re: [blink-dev] Intent to Ship: Capture all screens

LGTM3 On Wed, Sep 11, 2024 at 6:02 PM Vladimir Levin wrote: > LGTM2 > > On Wed, Sep 11, 2024 at 12:00 PM Alex Russell > wrote: > >> LGTM1 >> >> On Tuesday, September 10, 2024 at 3:36:50 PM UTC-7 Reilly Grant wrote: >> >>> LGTM as an IWA OWNER (3x LGTM from Blink API OWNERS are still required >>

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

This Intent makes me realize that my mental model of Private State Tokens wasn't correct. I'd been thinking of users going to a site that trusts them, having that site issue some tokens, and then going to another site which would redeem a token to increase its trust. In both cases, the sites could

Re: [blink-dev] PSA: Add Permission modals for Keyboard and Pointer Lock

Hi Rick, Yes. This is functionality completed in M130 and developers can use the flag chrome://flags/#keyboard-and-pointer-lock-prompt for testing. You can find the list of open bugs here . Thanks, Muyao On Tue, Sep 10, 2024 at 6:45 PM

Re: [blink-dev] PSA: Add Permission modals for Keyboard and Pointer Lock

Perfect, thank you Muyao! Please keep an eye out for reports of issues - the last thing we want to do is break any legitimate uses. Rick On Wed, Sep 11, 2024 at 4:25 PM Muyao Xu wrote: > Hi Rick, > > Yes. This is functionality completed in M130 and developers can use the > flag chrome://flags/#

Re: [blink-dev] Intent to Ship: WebXr hand input module - Level 1

Awesome to hear to see this shipping on Chrome! Quest browser has supported this API for close to 4 years and it's used by many developers and supported by all WebXR frameworks. Does your implementation ensure that the hand joints are not matched to the user? On Wed, Sep 11, 2024 at 11:35 AM 'Ale

[blink-dev] Intent to Ship: Attribution Reporting Feature: Debug Key Privacy Improvement

Contact emails akashna...@google.com, lin...@chromium.org, johni...@chromium.org Explainer Attribution Reporting with event-level reports Attribution Reporting API with Aggregatable Reports

Re: [blink-dev] Intent to Prototype: Rewriter API

I guess you guys miss the point. I ABSOLUTELY demand the right to block any website from running anything they choose through my local AI to what I would see if they asked me that question. So the first thing any website would do is first figure out what my local AI would say about a query until t

Re: [blink-dev] Intent to Prototype: Rewriter API

On Thu, Sep 12, 2024 at 1:44 PM Tom Jones wrote: > I guess you guys miss the point. I ABSOLUTELY demand the right to block > any website from running anything they choose through my local AI to what I > would see if they asked me that question. So the first thing any website > would do is first