I think this feature falls under Implementations of already-defined consensus-based standards <https://www.chromium.org/blink/launching-features/#process-existing-standard> in our process, and Signals from other implementations in an intent-to-ship <https://docs.google.com/document/d/1xkHRXnFS8GDqZi7E0SSbR3a7CZsGScdxPUWBsNgo-oo/edit?usp=sharing> aren't part of that section.
If this wasn't already shipped in Gecko I do agree with Alex that the spec status shouldn't carry a lot of weight and we should file standards positions, but I don't think our documented process backs up that preference. Anyway, this has already shipped in Gecko, and I don't think we need to file a standards position issue for WebKit. In other words, I'd be happy to LGTM this, but will abstain since Daniil is on my team. On Mon, Mar 6, 2023 at 6:49 PM Alex Russell <slightly...@chromium.org> wrote: > Our history with the WebKit project suggests that imputations of implicit > consent are unwelcome, and so in addition to the general orientation of our > process towards explicit evidence, it is in the interest of respecting the > WebKitten's own preferences that we ask formally. > > Best, > > Alex > > On Friday, March 3, 2023 at 8:33:26 PM UTC-8 flo...@rivoal.net wrote: > >> >> On 4Mar 2023, at 5:59, Alex Russell <slightly...@chromium.org> wrote: >> >> Our process does not pay much mind to arbitrary standards gates when >> others have not already shipped. If WebKit had (has?) implemented, that >> would shortcut our analysis, otherwise, it's still worth asking. >> >> >> The point is not about what the W3C Process say you can do at what stage, >> the point is that for a CSS spec to get to CR, there needs to be a sign off >> from the groups’ members that this is OK to ship. This is not as strong as >> “we want to ship this ourselves soon”, but this is stronger than “no >> signal”, as was stated earlier. >> >> This may be true in other groups, but it is especially true in the CSSWG, >> which includes all the browsers, and has an explicit policy that publishing >> something as a CR means we have consensus it is OK to ship it. >> https://www.w3.org/TR/css/#testing >> >> So my read of webkit’s position would be: “has indicated support for the >> feature being shipped in general, unclear when they intend to do so >> themselves”. It’s absolutely reasonable to ask webkit if you’re looking for >> something more firm that than (or more recent, or…), but I think it is >> worth noting you at least have that much. >> >> —Florian >> > -- > 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 blink-dev+unsubscr...@chromium.org. > To view this discussion on the web visit > https://groups.google.com/a/chromium.org/d/msgid/blink-dev/f709d52b-46ba-4390-b307-cda73990db1en%40chromium.org > <https://groups.google.com/a/chromium.org/d/msgid/blink-dev/f709d52b-46ba-4390-b307-cda73990db1en%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 blink-dev+unsubscr...@chromium.org. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/a/chromium.org/d/msgid/blink-dev/CAARdPYdxZ5_MvS-gB5mZKE8-zL8rr1FmH%2BghJwUR3iuQGjeiOA%40mail.gmail.com.
