Re: [blink-dev] Intent to Ship: WebXR Depth Sensing Performance Improvements

On 5/30/25 12:47 PM, Alex Cooper wrote: > Can you say more why you think a TAG review isn't applicable here? I see that TAG has reviewed a number of WebXR features in the past: https://github.com/search?q=repo%3Aw3ctag%2Fdesign-reviews+webxr&type=issues

Re: [blink-dev] Intent to Ship: Ed25519 in Web Cryptography

Hi all, [cc’ing Veronica, Denis] thank you Tom for the pointer. we had this discussion also in the W3C Security Interest Group. Part of the discussion was that, using the hybrid approach, Ed25519 is still valuable, but I cc’ed the cryptographers. If we believe there are limitations, it is usef

Re: [blink-dev] Intent to Ship: WebXR Depth Sensing Performance Improvements

Thanks Mike. I believe I've made all of the changes requested. > Can you update the chromestatus entry with this info (see the "Platform Support Explanation" field)? Thanks. Done. > I'm responding to the "Debuggability: None" in your email and chromestatus entry. It sounds like that should be upd

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

> Is this feature fully tested by web-platform-tests ? > No I assume lack of WPTs is due to limitations of testing web app functionality in web-platform-tests. In the past it looks like manual WPTs have be

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

I've definitely heard back from several companies (large and small) of the need for this. Erik Witt's analysis may be the only public support we've got, but there are a number of non-public teams waiting for this too. On Mon, 2 Jun 2025 at 19:25, Alex Russell wrote: > Thanks for this. I'm a litt

Re: [blink-dev] Intent to Ship: Ed25519 in Web Cryptography

Hi everyone ed25519 is useful to have for backwards compat, often used for eddsa deterministic sigs. I am a bit surprised it isn't included already. more in general I advise to have a liberal approach to inclusion, especially if not really expensive, as in this case. If any help is needed with

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

Multiple origins are possible, yeah: https://web-platform-tests.org/writing-tests/server-features.html#tests-involving-multiple-origins On 6/2/25 5:41 PM, 'Lu Huang' via blink-dev wrote: I thought about adding manual WPTs for this feature but it would require serving from 2 different origins in

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

I thought about adding manual WPTs for this feature but it would require serving from 2 different origins in the test environment. We did this in browser tests. Is that also feasible in WPTs? On Monday, June 2, 2025 at 12:01:23 PM UTC-7 dan...@microsoft.com wrote: > > Is this feature fully tes

[blink-dev] Intent to Ship: Translator API

Contact emails dome...@chromium.org, kenjibah...@chromium.org, a...@chromium.org, memm...@chromium.org, christin...@chromium.org Explainer https://github.com/webmachinelearning/translation-api/blob/main/README.md Specification https://webmachinelearning.github.io/translation-api/#translator-ap

Re: [blink-dev] Intent to Ship: WebXR Depth Sensing Performance Improvements

Thanks for answering all these questions, Alexander. LGTM1 On Monday, June 2, 2025 at 10:56:59 AM UTC-7 Alexander Cooper wrote: > Thanks Mike. I believe I've made all of the changes requested. > > > Can you update the chromestatus entry with this info (see the "Platform > Support Explanation" f

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

Thanks for this. I'm a little concerned that this is a workaround for an implementation-based restriction in chromium, and that the goal is to remove that restriction through rearchitecture at some point in the near future. Do we have a timeline for that? It would also be helpful to understand

Re: [blink-dev] Intent to Ship: WebXR Depth Sensing Performance Improvements

+1 - thanks Alex and Rik. LGTM2 On 6/2/25 2:20 PM, Alex Russell wrote: Thanks for answering all these questions, Alexander. LGTM1 On Monday, June 2, 2025 at 10:56:59 AM UTC-7 Alexander Cooper wrote: Thanks Mike. I believe I've made all of the changes requested. > Can you update the c

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

We don't have a timeline for removing that restriction. We believe it would be a multi-year engineering project, as it would involve changing the process model for how tabs work in Chromium, and don't have anyone staffed on it. (We filed this tracking bug

Re: [blink-dev] Intent to Ship: WebXR Depth Sensing Performance Improvements

On Mon, Jun 2, 2025 at 10:56 AM Alex Cooper wrote: > Thanks Mike. I believe I've made all of the changes requested. > > > Can you update the chromestatus entry with this info (see the "Platform > Support Explanation" field)? Thanks. > Done. > > > I'm responding to the "Debuggability: None" in you