LGTM3 On Wed, Aug 9, 2023 at 6:26 AM Mike Taylor <miketa...@chromium.org> wrote:
> LGTM2, so long as we have a killswitch. > On 8/9/23 7:08 AM, Daniel Bratell wrote: > > If I did the math correctly, that puts the likely breakage below 14% (95% > confidence) of the population, or less than 0.002% of page loads. (Napkin > math, don't quote me, but it's in that ballpark which is a good ballpark) > > LGTM1 > > /Daniel > On 2023-08-03 03:49, Joey Arhar wrote: > > I looked at the top 20 websites here: > https://chromestatus.com/metrics/feature/timeline/popularity/4454 > I looked at the option elements which were triggering the UseCounter, and > I found that all of them seemed to have a label attribute with no text > content at some point during page load, but then when I actually looked at > them in DevTools after page load they all had text content. > None of those top 20 websites are affected by this change. > > On Wed, Apr 26, 2023 at 9:22 AM Rick Byers <rby...@chromium.org> wrote: > >> Hey Joey, >> We discussed this in the API owners meeting today. Given that Firefox has >> succeeded in removing this quirk, we do think it's valuable for us to >> attempt to follow. Thank you again for pushing on it. Could you take a look >> at either 20 hits from HA, or 10 high-ranking hits >> <https://docs.google.com/document/d/1cpjWFoXBiuFYI4zb9I7wHs7uYZ0ntbOgLwH-mgqXdEM/edit#heading=h.1m1gg72jnnrt>* >> and >> see if you see any actual breakage? API owners agreed today that if you >> didn't (or if you saw just 1 in 20), we'd be OK proceeding with a >> killswitch we can pull if necessary. >> >> *Note chrishtr@ is looking into making ranking-based HA analysis easier >> than getting BigQuery setup. >> >> Thanks, >> Rick >> >> On Wed, Apr 19, 2023 at 11:06 AM Rick Byers <rby...@chromium.org> wrote: >> >>> Hey Joey, sorry for the delay. Yeah 0.01% puts this into the high risk >>> range unfortunately. If you want to proceed, the next step would probably >>> be to get a random sample of impacted URLs and evaluate the severity of >>> breakage >>> <https://docs.google.com/document/d/1RC-pBBvsazYfCNNUSkPqAVpSpNJ96U8trhNkfV0v9fk/edit#heading=h.u5ya6jvru7dl> >>> and ease of adaptation >>> <https://docs.google.com/document/d/1RC-pBBvsazYfCNNUSkPqAVpSpNJ96U8trhNkfV0v9fk/edit#heading=h.x5bhg5grhfeo>. >>> Maybe we'd find they are almost all pages with very subtle layout changes >>> which already look OK or just slightly off in Firefox. The real risk likely >>> comes from sites / apps designed for blink/webkit only (enterprise, android >>> webview, etc.). But if you could show evidence that < 1 in 20 impacted page >>> loads have any meaningful breakage (i.e. <0.005% page views impacted), then >>> we might still be able to proceed with appropriate webview and enterprise >>> guards. But that obviously has a cost, so up to you if it's better to just >>> specify the current quirky behavior. Maybe our efforts are better spent >>> trying to actively drive down quirks mode usage somehow? >>> >>> Thanks for trying to clean this sort of thing up! >>> Rick >>> >>> On Wed, Apr 12, 2023 at 5:34 PM Joey Arhar <jar...@chromium.org> wrote: >>> >>>> Here is the UseCounter: >>>> https://chromestatus.com/metrics/feature/timeline/popularity/4454 >>>> It looks like it is at 0.0103% >>>> What do yall think? >>>> >>>> > Personally I would be happy to approve if we had a UseCounter with >>>> less than our small but non-trivial risk threshold of 0.001% of page loads >>>> >>>> Looks like its higher than this threshold :( >>>> >>>> On Wed, Apr 12, 2023 at 3:53 AM Yoav Weiss <yoavwe...@chromium.org> >>>> wrote: >>>> >>>>> Friendly ping! :) >>>>> >>>>> On Wednesday, March 15, 2023 at 7:13:25 PM UTC+1 Joey Arhar wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> Yes, that matches my understanding. I can see on omahaproxy that the >>>>>> usecounter was merged in 112 and I can see on chromiumdash that 112 goes >>>>>> to >>>>>> stable on april 4 >>>>>> >>>>>> On Wed, Mar 15, 2023 at 11:11 AM Yoav Weiss <yoavwe...@chromium.org> >>>>>> wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>> Looked at this following the API owners meeting and given that the >>>>>>> usecounters >>>>>>> <https://chromium-review.googlesource.com/c/chromium/src/+/4193560> >>>>>>> landed >>>>>>> in 112, I think we can expect stable data early April but not before. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Joey - does that match your understanding? >>>>>>> >>>>>>> On Sat, Jan 28, 2023 at 1:04 AM Rick Byers <rby...@chromium.org> >>>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> On Thu, Jan 26, 2023 at 5:07 PM Simon Pieters <zcor...@mozilla.com> >>>>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Hi folks! >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Thanks for working on this, Joey. Removing quirks where possible >>>>>>>>> is always nice! >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> On Wed, Jan 25, 2023 at 7:18 PM Joey Arhar <jar...@chromium.org> >>>>>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> Sounds good, I'm adding a UseCounter here: >>>>>>>>>> https://chromium-review.googlesource.com/c/chromium/src/+/4193560 >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> On Tue, Jan 24, 2023 at 8:05 AM Rick Byers <rby...@chromium.org> >>>>>>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> Hey Joey, >>>>>>>>>>> Thanks for working to remove a quirk! Although we haven't >>>>>>>>>>> written it into our compat principles >>>>>>>>>>> <http://bit.ly/blink-compat>, I'm personally willing to accept >>>>>>>>>>> greater compat risk for removing quirks as they're by-definition >>>>>>>>>>> legacy >>>>>>>>>>> behavior of the web which create an ongoing complexity burden for >>>>>>>>>>> the >>>>>>>>>>> platform which we should seek to eventually eliminate. >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> Reading through the history >>>>>>>>>>> <https://github.com/whatwg/html/issues/2988#issuecomment-1271763702> >>>>>>>>>>> of WebKit not being able to make this change due to severe breakage >>>>>>>>>>> in >>>>>>>>>>> bugzilla and seeing that we still load 12% of pages in quirks >>>>>>>>>>> mode >>>>>>>>>>> <https://chromestatus.com/metrics/feature/timeline/popularity/2034>, >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> In https://almanac.httparchive.org/en/2020/markup#conclusion the >>>>>>>>> number was 3.97% of *pages* in httparchive are in quirks mode, and if >>>>>>>>> I >>>>>>>>> remember correctly, this has further declined slightly in 2021 and >>>>>>>>> 2022. >>>>>>>>> I'm not sure why there's a 3x discrepancy between the use counter >>>>>>>>> page view >>>>>>>>> number and the httparchive pages number, though. Does an >>>>>>>>> about:blank iframe trigger the use counter? >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Wow, that is surprising to me! Typically the biggest discrepancy >>>>>>>> comes from the fact that usage is head-heavy with 1/3rd of page >>>>>>>> loads being from the top 100 origins >>>>>>>> <https://twitter.com/RickByers/status/1195342331588706306>, and I >>>>>>>> would absolutely expect the head to not be using quirks mode. Perhaps >>>>>>>> there's one or two popular sites using quirks mode? No, only http/https >>>>>>>> schemes contribute to UseCounters IIRC so about:blank shouldn't be >>>>>>>> the problem. Or maybe there's some discrepancy in how we're >>>>>>>> identifying >>>>>>>> quirky pages. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> cheers, >>>>>>>>> -- >>>>>>>>> Simon Pieters >>>>>>>>> https://www.mozilla.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 blink-dev+unsubscr...@chromium.org. >>>>>>>> To view this discussion on the web visit >>>>>>>> https://groups.google.com/a/chromium.org/d/msgid/blink-dev/CAFUtAY8ZizCwMOX_r8dKbJ44xNkih7J4Tx7z31DNnPOrmLRH%2Bw%40mail.gmail.com >>>>>>>> <https://groups.google.com/a/chromium.org/d/msgid/blink-dev/CAFUtAY8ZizCwMOX_r8dKbJ44xNkih7J4Tx7z31DNnPOrmLRH%2Bw%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 blink-dev+unsubscr...@chromium.org. > To view this discussion on the web visit > https://groups.google.com/a/chromium.org/d/msgid/blink-dev/CAK6btwL%3Dw6ae2pLNYXnwO6cRRFwRuTu7wU9zdVVoxN%3DGe4fQVQ%40mail.gmail.com > <https://groups.google.com/a/chromium.org/d/msgid/blink-dev/CAK6btwL%3Dw6ae2pLNYXnwO6cRRFwRuTu7wU9zdVVoxN%3DGe4fQVQ%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 blink-dev+unsubscr...@chromium.org. > To view this discussion on the web visit > https://groups.google.com/a/chromium.org/d/msgid/blink-dev/de5ea453-88e0-4d21-8534-45cbd8d336a6%40chromium.org > <https://groups.google.com/a/chromium.org/d/msgid/blink-dev/de5ea453-88e0-4d21-8534-45cbd8d336a6%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/CAOMQ%2Bw-n38cykud1tAZtWYPc-UVM6%3DV9qvV3j9HPMD0FNgP14A%40mail.gmail.com.
