On Mon, Jun 26, 2023 at 12:44 PM Vladimir Levin <[email protected]> wrote:

>
> On Mon, Jun 26, 2023 at 12:16 PM Yoav Weiss <[email protected]>
> wrote:
>
>>
>>
>> On Mon, Jun 26, 2023 at 5:35 PM Vladimir Levin <[email protected]> wrote:
>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On Fri, Jun 16, 2023 at 1:12 PM Vladimir Levin <[email protected]>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Thank you for your feedback. My responses are inline below
>>>>
>>>> On Wed, Jun 14, 2023 at 12:24 AM Yoav Weiss <[email protected]>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> On Fri, Jun 9, 2023 at 10:19 PM 'Vladimir Levin' via blink-dev <
>>>>> [email protected]> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> Contact [email protected]
>>>>>>
>>>>>> SpecificationNone
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Summary
>>>>>>
>>>>>> This feature extends the existing contain-intrinsic-size syntax: none
>>>>>> | <length> | auto && <length> to also include auto && none: none | 
>>>>>> <length>
>>>>>> | auto && <length> | auto && none The reason for this change is the CSSWG
>>>>>> resolution (
>>>>>> https://github.com/w3c/csswg-drafts/issues/8407#issuecomment-1440466558)
>>>>>> to add an interaction between content-visibility: auto and
>>>>>> contain-intrinsic-size. Specifically, that the former adds an "auto"
>>>>>> keyword to the latter. For this to work, the resolution includes a note 
>>>>>> to
>>>>>> extend contain-intrinsic-size syntax for "auto" to work with all existing
>>>>>> keywords, including "none".
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Blink componentBlink>CSS
>>>>>> <https://bugs.chromium.org/p/chromium/issues/list?q=component:Blink%3ECSS>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> TAG reviewNone
>>>>>>
>>>>>> TAG review statusNot applicable
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Risks
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Interoperability and Compatibility
>>>>>>
>>>>>> There is a risk of interoperability since the new syntax would
>>>>>> previously be considered invalid, and result in a default behavior
>>>>>> (equivalent to contain-intrinsic-size: none). Sites currently specifying
>>>>>> contain-intrinsic-size: auto none would have their behavior change on
>>>>>> Chromium after this feature launches.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I estimate this risk to be low.
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Would you be able to confirm that estimate e.g. with an HTTP archive
>>>>> search?
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> I'm in the process of figuring out how to do this, and will get back to
>>>> you with the results when I have them. My estimate stems from the fact that
>>>> currently "contain-intrinsic-size: auto none" is considered an invalid
>>>> syntax, making it unlikely to be used as a value.
>>>>
>>>
>>> Based on my http archive queries that use regular expression to match
>>> particular values of contain-intrinsic-[a-z-]* (size, width, height,
>>> block-size, inline-size), out of all of the contain-intrinsic-* values, 
>>> *about
>>> half of them (50%) have an 'auto' keyword *that follows the semicolon
>>> and possibly whitespace. *However, 0 of those have "auto[ ]*none" in
>>> them*.
>>>
>>> As a disclaimer, the total amount of contain-intrinsic-* pages I got
>>> using these queries is substantially smaller than the use counter data
>>> would indicate. I presume this is due to limitations such as case
>>> sensitivity, script constructing these values, etc, but I'm not sure.
>>>
>>> This seems to confirm my estimate of low risk in enabling this by
>>> default. Let me know if you agree, or whether you'd like me to do more
>>> research.
>>>
>>
>> Thanks for confirming that!!
>>
>>
>>>
>>> Thanks in advance,
>>> vmpstr
>>>
>>>
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> *Gecko*: No signal This change was discussed in CSSWG and there were
>>>>>> no objections to the resolutions
>>>>>>
>>>>>> *WebKit*: No signal This change was discussed in CSSWG and there
>>>>>> were no objections to the resolutions
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Can you please file signals? I don't believe a CSSWG counts as a
>>>>> positive signal. Also, I don't believe I saw a comment from any WebKit
>>>>> person on the minutes.
>>>>> A signal request would let them know this is being worked on in
>>>>> Chromium.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> I have filed the following requests for positions:
>>>> Mozilla: https://github.com/mozilla/standards-positions/issues/827
>>>> WebKit: https://github.com/WebKit/standards-positions/issues/205
>>>>
>>>
>> Both positions indicate there are open spec questions. Can you expand on
>> those and their future compat/interop risk?
>>
>
> Mozilla's comment (needs a spec) is being address in the following PR:
> https://github.com/w3c/csswg-drafts/pull/8989
>

I've added a blurb about this in the compat/interop risk section.


> WebKit's comment about an open question seems to refer to discussion that
> follows the resolution with one question from Emilio:
> https://github.com/w3c/csswg-drafts/issues/8407#issuecomment-1496753402. This
> question relates to a different part of the resolution (content-visibility:
> auto "upgrading" contain-intrinsic-size to have an auto keyword).
>
> I've added a comment to both position requests.
>
> Thanks,
> vmpstr
>
>
>>
>>>
>>>> I've updated the chrome status entry page with this information.
>>>>
>>>> Thanks,
>>>> vmpstr
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> *Web developers*: No signals
>>>>>>
>>>>>> *Other signals*:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Ergonomics
>>>>>>
>>>>>> None. This is an improvement which will allow future work to improve
>>>>>> ergonomics of content-visibility.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Activation
>>>>>>
>>>>>> None.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Security
>>>>>>
>>>>>> None.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> 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?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> None
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Debuggability
>>>>>>
>>>>>> This feature is debuggable in the same way as other CSS features.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Will this feature be supported on all six Blink platforms (Windows,
>>>>>> Mac, Linux, Chrome OS, Android, and Android WebView)?Yes
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Is this feature fully tested by web-platform-tests
>>>>>> <https://chromium.googlesource.com/chromium/src/+/main/docs/testing/web_platform_tests.md>
>>>>>> ?Yes
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Flag nameCSSContainIntrinsicSizeAutoNone
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Requires code in //chrome?False
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Tracking bug
>>>>>> https://bugs.chromium.org/p/chromium/issues/detail?id=1453733
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Estimated milestones
>>>>>>
>>>>>> M116
>>>>>>
>>>>>> 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).
>>>>>> None
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Link to entry on the Chrome Platform Status
>>>>>> https://chromestatus.com/feature/6203168806928384
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Links to previous Intent discussions
>>>>>>
>>>>>> 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/CADsXd2MgWYdmrJ1JHv0rYTWr2wcqUQ%2BZUriH5UQAREw7Wg0Ptg%40mail.gmail.com
>>>>>> <https://groups.google.com/a/chromium.org/d/msgid/blink-dev/CADsXd2MgWYdmrJ1JHv0rYTWr2wcqUQ%2BZUriH5UQAREw7Wg0Ptg%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/CADsXd2P5gqcGvFv%3DiKFMJuOxBn6Q9%3DWu2t_CDShybW%2B-DyyjOA%40mail.gmail.com.

Reply via email to