LGTM2 On Friday, May 20, 2022 at 9:44:11 PM UTC+2 Dave Tapuska wrote:
> Ya I only ran into this when investigating how visibility really works. > Such as visibilityChanged events and document.visibilityState do not change > for a hidden iframe. (which I guess is correct based on its definition, > because those are about the tab being in the foreground or not). The only > problem I have with this definition is that the CSS spec declares it as > "rendered" and if someone is considering that as pixels on the display that > isn't quite correct. > > I did find enough stack overflow articles about people asking about > interactions with the parent document. I don't think making it work for > same origin iframes vs cross origin iframes is something that would give > much benefit. > > dave. > > On Fri, May 20, 2022 at 2:39 PM Joey Arhar <[email protected]> wrote: > >> > Oh that is what was debated here >> <https://github.com/w3c/csswg-drafts/issues/6850#issuecomment-1010363945> >> >> I think that the use of "document" there was about being in the viewport >> and being painted, not about iframes. >> >> Currently, isVisible doesn't look at parent iframes. I don't think >> there's anything wrong with adding that functionality for LocalFrames, but >> doing so for RemoteFrames would probably have security/privacy >> considerations. >> >> On Thu, May 19, 2022 at 5:17 PM Dave Tapuska <[email protected]> >> wrote: >> >>> So how does this method work for iframes that have their visibility >>> hidden? Is it intended to work for that? >>> >>> <iframe style="visibility:hidden"> >>> <div></div> >>> </iframe> >>> >>> div's isVisible will always be true. Perhaps isVisible needs a caveat >>> that it only works for the current document. Oh that is what was debated >>> here >>> <https://github.com/w3c/csswg-drafts/issues/6850#issuecomment-1010363945> >>> . >>> >>> dave. >>> >>> On Thu, May 19, 2022 at 6:52 PM Mike Taylor <[email protected]> >>> wrote: >>> >>>> Given the CSSWG resolution in >>>> https://github.com/w3c/csswg-drafts/issues/7274#issuecomment-1130214343, >>>> LGTM1 to ship assuming we're not shipping `checkInert` with the rest. >>>> >>>> Thanks for addressing Mozilla's feedback. >>>> >>>> On 5/5/22 4:26 PM, Joey Arhar wrote: >>>> >>>> > Can you ask for signals? >>>> >>>> https://github.com/mozilla/standards-positions/issues/634 >>>> https://lists.webkit.org/pipermail/webkit-dev/2022-May/032218.html >>>> >>>> On Wed, May 4, 2022 at 3:02 AM Yoav Weiss <[email protected]> >>>> wrote: >>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> On Wednesday, May 4, 2022 at 1:08:11 AM UTC+2 Joey Arhar wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> Contact emails [email protected] >>>>>> >>>>>> Explainer >>>>>> https://github.com/WICG/display-locking/blob/main/explainers/isvisible.md >>>>>> >>>>>> Specification >>>>>> https://drafts.csswg.org/cssom-view/#dom-element-isvisible >>>>>> >>>>>> Summary >>>>>> >>>>>> Element.isVisible() returns true if the element is visible, and false >>>>>> if it is not. It checks a variety of factors that would make an element >>>>>> invisible, including display:none, visibility, content-visibility, and >>>>>> opacity. >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> Blink component Blink>DOM >>>>>> <https://bugs.chromium.org/p/chromium/issues/list?q=component:Blink%3EDOM> >>>>>> >>>>>> TAG review https://github.com/w3ctag/design-reviews/issues/734 >>>>>> >>>>>> TAG review status Pending >>>>>> >>>>>> Risks >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> Interoperability and Compatibility >>>>>> >>>>>> This feature is not particularly contentious or complicated, but is >>>>>> mostly useful in the presence of content-visibility. >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> Gecko: No signal >>>>>> >>>>>> WebKit: No signal >>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Can you ask for signals? >>>>> >>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> Web developers: No signals >>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Would be good to gather signals here as well. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> Other signals: >>>>>> >>>>>> Ergonomics >>>>>> >>>>>> This feature could be used in tandem with content-visibility or >>>>>> details elements. Usage of this API will not make it hard for Chrome to >>>>>> maintain good performance. >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> Activation >>>>>> >>>>>> This feature is easy to feature detect and polyfill. >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> Security >>>>>> >>>>>> I have no security risks/considerations for this feature. >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> WebView application risks >>>>>> >>>>>> Does this intent deprecate or change behavior of existing APIs, such >>>>>> that it has potentially high risk for Android WebView-based applications? >>>>>> >>>>>> This does not deprecate or change any existing APIs and does not have >>>>>> any risk for WebView. >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> Debuggability >>>>>> >>>>>> This feature does not need any new debugging features. >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> Is this feature fully tested by web-platform-tests >>>>>> <https://chromium.googlesource.com/chromium/src/+/master/docs/testing/web_platform_tests.md> >>>>>> ? Yes >>>>>> >>>>>> Flag name --enable-blink-features=isVisible >>>>>> >>>>>> Requires code in //chrome? False >>>>>> >>>>>> Tracking bug >>>>>> https://bugs.chromium.org/p/chromium/issues/detail?id=1309533 >>>>>> >>>>>> Estimated milestones >>>>>> >>>>>> 103 >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> Anticipated spec changes >>>>>> >>>>>> Open questions about a feature may be a source of future web compat >>>>>> or interop issues. Please list open issues (e.g. links to known github >>>>>> issues in the project for the feature specification) whose resolution >>>>>> may >>>>>> introduce web compat/interop risk (e.g., changing to naming or structure >>>>>> of >>>>>> the API in a non-backward-compatible way). >>>>>> https://github.com/w3c/csswg-drafts/issues/7232 >>>>>> >>>>>> Link to entry on the Chrome Platform Status >>>>>> https://chromestatus.com/feature/5163102852087808 >>>>>> >>>>>> Links to previous Intent discussions Intent to prototype: >>>>>> https://groups.google.com/a/chromium.org/d/msgid/blink-dev/CAK6btwK01yGZ0LVb6M_8WdeC5OM0qfUv5T1TUO%3D1if1G%2BKogRw%40mail.gmail.com >>>>>> >>>>>> <https://groups.google.com/a/chromium.org/d/msgid/blink-dev/CAK6btwK01yGZ0LVb6M_8WdeC5OM0qfUv5T1TUO=1if1g+ko...@mail.gmail.com> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> This intent message was generated by Chrome Platform Status >>>>>> <https://chromestatus.com/>. >>>>>> >>>>> -- >>>> 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/CAK6btwKkoRBHUja0MePoXLRq0vN_WVeF%3Dr2se34ThXo5Tr%2BdtQ%40mail.gmail.com >>>> >>>> <https://groups.google.com/a/chromium.org/d/msgid/blink-dev/CAK6btwKkoRBHUja0MePoXLRq0vN_WVeF%3Dr2se34ThXo5Tr%2BdtQ%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/b0204d81-ded9-9c94-7a7e-6910b91d88dc%40chromium.org >>>> >>>> <https://groups.google.com/a/chromium.org/d/msgid/blink-dev/b0204d81-ded9-9c94-7a7e-6910b91d88dc%40chromium.org?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/61cc4037-c6b3-4516-af0f-3122f41c6b37n%40chromium.org.
