On Wed, Nov 24, 2021 at 5:21 AM Dominik Röttsches <[email protected]> wrote:
> Hi Rick & Frédéric, > > On Mon, Nov 22, 2021 at 11:27 PM Rick Byers <[email protected]> wrote: > >> >> I wonder if we have metrics about unrenderable characters? I.e. how often >> we fail to render some text because the glyph isn't present in the selected >> font? If we did, then I think it would be pretty easy to do a finch trial >> for changes like this and decide go/no-go based on that data. >> > > We used to have a metric to tell us for which Unicode code block no > fallback character was found after the primary fonts, user preference font > and system fallback, but I think we removed that after it had given us the > useful information that these were mostly math symbols and some emoji. For > privacy reasons we can't have a metric to track missing glyph coverage for > single characters, but the bucketed Unicode block approach worked. To my > knowledge we do not (and did not) have metrics on coverage/missing glyphs > per selected font. > Ok, thanks! Any thoughts on the compat risk of this change? If we spot check 10 HA results and can explain why the change doesn't noticeably break anything on those 10, then I'm guessing that makes this change low enough risk to proceed. But I'm not sure I trust my judgment on that. WDYT? Dominik > > >> On Mon, Nov 22, 2021 at 4:27 AM Yoav Weiss <[email protected]> >> wrote: >> >>> Based on +Rick Byers <[email protected]>'s HA for webcompat document >>> <https://docs.google.com/document/d/1cpjWFoXBiuFYI4zb9I7wHs7uYZ0ntbOgLwH-mgqXdEM/edit#>, >>> I just ran the following query: >>> ``` >>> SELECT url FROM `httparchive.latest.pages_mobile` >>> WHERE JSON_EXTRACT(payload, "$._blinkFeatureFirstUsed.Features['3987']") >>> IS NOT NULL >>> ``` >>> Results are here >>> <https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1WZTRBujaaFrtUaRnBOoVYzJkZuColXFN-GgToF6nR5Q/edit?usp=sharing> >>> . >>> In short, there are 191 pages that touch this usecounter, out of 7655542 >>> pages in that table. (or ~0.0025% of pages) >>> >>> This resolves my previous concerns about HA showing an order of >>> magnitude more usage than our chromestatus use counter data. >>> >>> While digging into UKM data could be interesting, it'd take some time to >>> gather, so it might be sufficient to take a random sample from the HA list >>> and see what the impact on those sites would be. >>> >>> >>> On Mon, Nov 22, 2021 at 9:49 AM Frédéric Wang <[email protected]> wrote: >>> >>>> Le 18/11/2021 à 21:29, Chris Harrelson a écrit : >>>> >>>> >>>> Would it be possible to get results of top pages hitting the use >>>>> counter, so one can analyze them more carefully ? Do we need to do any >>>>> additional change in Chromium to make that possible ? >>>>> >>>> >>>> chromestatus.com already has this feature, by combining UseCounter >>>> with HTTPArchive. It can take a while for this data to be populated though, >>>> because of latency in the indexing. >>>> >>>> >>>>> Hi Chris, >>>> >>>> Last week Chromestatus was showing wrong results, basically for any >>>> feature it was returning matches for all HTTPArchive pages. Now it returns >>>> no data at all for -webkit-standard. Not sure if we need to wait more >>>> before indexing happens... >>>> >>>> Otherwise, I was thinking of something we did for scroll position >>>> values in non-default writing modes in the past [1] i.e. use UKM to better >>>> collect and analyze affected origins and maybe introducing a finch flag to >>>> ship this more safely (the code change to disable that is one line [2] so >>>> that should be easy). But IIRC we will need help from a Googler for that >>>> purpose. >>>> >>>> [1] >>>> https://groups.google.com/a/chromium.org/g/blink-dev/c/7X2CKPGeEa0/m/7Rau54VwDQAJ >>>> >>>> [2] https://chromium-review.googlesource.com/c/chromium/src/+/3282157 >>>> >>>> -- >>>> Frédéric Wang >>>> >>>> -- >>>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google >>>> Groups "blink-dev" group. >>>> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send >>>> an email to [email protected]. >>>> To view this discussion on the web visit >>>> https://groups.google.com/a/chromium.org/d/msgid/blink-dev/f4dd6049-8221-e881-8979-c9029dc5ae01%40igalia.com >>>> <https://groups.google.com/a/chromium.org/d/msgid/blink-dev/f4dd6049-8221-e881-8979-c9029dc5ae01%40igalia.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer> >>>> . >>>> >>> -- >> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups >> "blink-dev" group. >> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an >> email to [email protected]. >> To view this discussion on the web visit >> https://groups.google.com/a/chromium.org/d/msgid/blink-dev/CAFUtAY9fqrpWok%3DB_s2qBacf%2BHZzcJYHiWY3e6OHODQ%2BWiVDXw%40mail.gmail.com >> <https://groups.google.com/a/chromium.org/d/msgid/blink-dev/CAFUtAY9fqrpWok%3DB_s2qBacf%2BHZzcJYHiWY3e6OHODQ%2BWiVDXw%40mail.gmail.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer> >> . >> > -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "blink-dev" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/a/chromium.org/d/msgid/blink-dev/CAFUtAY_edE85VWAUmxA1_xr2X%2B-CjMeaYXQHD2mpfVXwFx4hSg%40mail.gmail.com.
