Re: [blink-dev] Intent to Continue Experimenting: Tabbed Web Apps

LGTM to extend. The recent spec progress looks significant, and other areas are in good shape. On Wed, Mar 13, 2024 at 11:36 AM Matt Giuca wrote: > The original trial was from 118 to 123, inclusive. > > We want to extend it so it continues running from 124 to 126, inclusive. > > On Fri, 8 Mar

Re: [blink-dev] Intent to Continue Experimenting: Tabbed Web Apps

The original trial was from 118 to 123, inclusive. We want to extend it so it continues running from 124 to 126, inclusive. On Fri, 8 Mar 2024 at 16:52, Domenic Denicola wrote: > For what milestones do you want to extend the experiment for? > > On Thu, Mar 7, 2024 at 3:39 PM Matt Giuca wrote:

Re: [blink-dev] Intent to Ship: Add JavaScript timer wake up alignment for unimportant cross-origin frames

Can you fill out the interoperability and compatibility risks section here? I don't think standards position requests are necessary, but saying how this behavior might break existing sites that assume Chromium's current behavior, and how this new behavior compares to WebKit and Gecko, would be

Re: [blink-dev] Intent to Ship: 'pageswap' event

Assuming that change gets appropriate spec updates and web platform tests coverage, that should be no problem. Thanks to you and the security team for looking out for our users! On Wed, Mar 13, 2024 at 7:26 AM 'Khushal Sagar' via blink-dev < blink-dev@chromium.org> wrote: > Hey folks, > >

Re: [blink-dev] Intent to Ship: 'pageswap' event

Hey folks, There's a minor change to the semantics of this event based on security feedback: https://github.com/whatwg/html/issues/10196. Originally we provided the activation info if the navigation is same-origin. The proposed change is to limit it further to same-origin navigations with no

Re: [blink-dev] Intent to Ship: Interoperable mousemove default action

LGTM2 On Tue, Mar 12, 2024, 13:03 Chris Harrelson wrote: > Sounds good to me! LGTM1 > > On Tue, Mar 12, 2024 at 9:53 AM Mustaq Ahmed wrote: > >> Hi API Owners: >> >> We concluded this feature is safe to ship after investigating the few sites >> that are affecting our use-counter: >> - None of

Re: [blink-dev] Intent to Ship: WebGPU: ServiceWorker and SharedWorker support

LGTM1 On Tue, Mar 12, 2024, 15:10 'François Beaufort' via blink-dev < blink-dev@chromium.org> wrote: > > > On Tue, Mar 12, 2024 at 6:58 PM Mike Taylor > wrote: > >> On 3/11/24 4:06 PM, 'François Beaufort' via blink-dev wrote: >> >> Contact emails fbeauf...@google.com >> >> Explainer None >> >>

Re: [blink-dev] Intent to Ship: Adding Cross-site Ancestor Chain Bit to CHIPS Partition Key

> > The first mitigation listed here is to migrate existing > partitioned cookies to include the new bit, and the second mitigation is to > have a flag that can disable this feature. Would disabling the feature also > include migrating the existing cookies back to exclude the new bit? > Disabling

Re: [blink-dev] Intent to Ship: FedCM CORS requirement on ID assertion endpoint

Regarding risk: we are going to implement this and test the IDPs we know are currently using FedCM, but we do not anticipate them to break since they are currently already relying on using third-party cookies in iframes. We also plan to have developer outreach/blogpost for this change so

Re: [blink-dev] Intent to Ship: WebGPU: ServiceWorker and SharedWorker support

On Tue, Mar 12, 2024 at 6:58 PM Mike Taylor wrote: > On 3/11/24 4:06 PM, 'François Beaufort' via blink-dev wrote: > > Contact emails fbeauf...@google.com > > Explainer None > > Could you write a few sentences why this is a useful addition? > Service Workers enable offline capabilities and

Re: [blink-dev] Intent to Ship: Adding Cross-site Ancestor Chain Bit to CHIPS Partition Key

On Mon, Mar 11, 2024 at 1:42 PM Aaron Selya wrote: > Contact emails > > se...@chromium.org, dylancut...@chromium.org, kaustub...@chromium.org > > > Explainer > > Keying of "CHIPS" cookies should align with other state: > > >

Re: [blink-dev] Intent to Ship: WebGPU: ServiceWorker and SharedWorker support

On 3/11/24 4:06 PM, 'François Beaufort' via blink-dev wrote: Contact emails fbeauf...@google.com Explainer None Could you write a few sentences why this is a useful addition? Specification https://gpuweb.github.io/gpuweb/#navigator-gpu Summary

Re: [blink-dev] Intent to Ship: FedCM CORS requirement on ID assertion endpoint

On 3/12/24 11:33 AM, Nicolás Peña Moreno wrote: Thanks for the suggestion, Yoav! It seems something fetch experts have some concerns about, so we do not plan to proceed with that suggestion at the moment. I'd like to append a small addition to this I2S (mainly to avoid having an additional

Re: [blink-dev] Intent to Ship: Interoperable mousemove default action

Sounds good to me! LGTM1 On Tue, Mar 12, 2024 at 9:53 AM Mustaq Ahmed wrote: > Hi API Owners: > > We concluded this feature is safe to ship after investigating the few sites > that are affecting our use-counter: > - None of UKM reported sites show any usability problem in our > investigation. >

Re: [blink-dev] Intent to Ship: Interoperable mousemove default action

Hi API Owners: We concluded this feature is safe to ship after investigating the few sites that are affecting our use-counter: - None of UKM reported sites show any usability problem in our investigation. - On one of those sites, a mouse drag over menu items starts text selection (w/o affecting

Re: [blink-dev] Intent to Ship: FedCM CORS requirement on ID assertion endpoint

Thanks for the suggestion, Yoav! It seems something fetch experts have some concerns about, so we do not plan to proceed with that suggestion at the moment. I'd like to append a small addition to this I2S (mainly to avoid having an additional PSA since it is very related to this one): we would

Re: [blink-dev] Intent to Experiment: WebAssembly JS String Builtins

Hi Emanuel, For OTs, we can approve extensions for 3 milestones at a time, depending on the criteria set at https://www.chromium.org/blink/launching-features/#origin-trials. Would you mind summarizing progress in the various areas? It sounds like there is good engagement from the "spec

Re: [blink-dev] Intent to Ship: Add JavaScript timer wake up alignment for unimportant cross-origin frames

Okay I update the process stage in Chrome Platform Status, and paste the newly-generated Intent above. Please take a look. https://chromestatus.com/feature/5106220399853568 On Tuesday, March 12, 2024 at 8:57:59 PM UTC+8 Zheda Chen wrote: > *Intent to Ship: Add JavaScript timer wake up

Re: [blink-dev] Intent to Ship: Add JavaScript timer wake up alignment for unimportant cross-origin frames

*Intent to Ship: Add JavaScript timer wake up alignment for unimportant cross-origin frames* Contact emails zheda.c...@intel.com, fdo...@chromium.org Specification https://html.spec.whatwg.org/multipage/timers-and-user-prompts.html Summary Align wake ups of JavaScript timers for unimportant

[blink-dev] Intent to Experiment: WebAssembly JS String Builtins

Dear API owners, Our origin trial on supporting JS Strings in Wasm (JS String Builtins for Wasm) has reached its