LGTM to extend. Breaking the transitive dependency problem with OOPIF seems like an effective and pragmatic strategy to me, I'm excited to see where that goes.
One nit below. On Fri, Jan 19, 2024 at 12:06 PM Camille Lamy <cl...@chromium.org> wrote: > Contact emails > > v...@chromium.org cl...@chromium.org > > Explainer > > > https://docs.google.com/document/d/1zDlfvfTJ_9e8Jdc8ehuV4zMEu9ySMCiTGMS9y0GU92k > > Specification > > https://tc39.github.io/ecma262/#sec-sharedarraybuffer-objects > > Design docs Including the new security requirements > > > https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Web/JavaScript/Reference/Global_Objects/SharedArrayBuffer > > Discussion how and what to gate > > https://github.com/whatwg/html/issues/4732 > > Summary > > ‘SharedArrayBuffers’ (SABs) on desktop platforms are restricted to > cross-origin isolated environments, matching the behavior we've recently > shipped on Android and Firefox. We've performed that change in Chrome 92. A > reverse OT was started to give developers the option to use SABs in case > they are not able to adopt cross origin isolation yet. > > We’ve worked with multiple internal and external users of the OT to > understand their use cases and why they can’t adopt yet. With > COEP:credentialless and iframes credentialless now available, the SAB non > COI usage went further down. > > Unfortunately, the cascading requirements of COEP are still a blocker for > COI adoption. Some of the users of the OT rely heavily on credentialled > cross-origin subresources, so credentialless modes are not an option for > them. And their apps are complex enough that they are still blocked on > child iframes supporting COEP. > > To address this, we’re exploring ways of enabling COI that would take > advantage of process isolation in order to waive requirements on child > frames to enforce COEP. However, this is still at an exploratory stage. So > we would like to request a 3 milestones extension (until M124) to this > deprecation trial. This will give us enough time to propose a solution and > discuss it with the standards community and users of the reverse OT. We > will then come back with a proposed solution to finally end the OT and get > the remaining users of the reverse OT, as well as a timeline for the OT > ending. > Blink component > > Blink>JavaScript > <https://bugs.chromium.org/p/chromium/issues/list?q=component:Blink%3EJavaScript> > > Search tags > > SharedArrayBuffer > <https://chromestatus.com/features#tags:SharedArrayBuffer>, SAB > <https://chromestatus.com/features#tags:SAB> > > TAG reviewhttps://github.com/w3ctag/design-reviews/issues/471 > TAG review statusClosed > RisksInteroperability and Compatibility > > We expect this change to negatively impact developers using > `SharedArrayBuffer` today. Chrome was the only platform where SABs have > been available without COOP/COEP. Therefore we need to give developers the > right capabilities and a clear path forward to ensure they’ve enough time > to adopt. We aim to mitigate these risks by adopting a longer-than-usual > depreciation period with console warnings/issues and a reverse origin > trial. > > Good news is usage is down to ~0.0209% > <https://chromestatus.com/metrics/feature/popularity#V8SharedArrayBufferConstructedWithoutIsolation> > page loads and that other browsers have or are shipping SABs again gated > behind COOP/COEP. Bad news is that Chromium was the only browser that > supported SABs without COI, therefore we need to provide a migration path > to not break existing sites. > Is it really "down"? The graph <https://chromestatus.com/metrics/feature/timeline/popularity/3721> is up and down, but overall seems like an upward trend over the past two years, not a downward one, right? If anything that should make the argument for urgency on an alternative adoption strategy like you propose higher (not something we can fix with more outreach and time). > Gecko: Shipped/Shipping ( > https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1312446) > > WebKit: Added COOP/COEP and SAB support recently gated behind COOP/COEP > > Will this feature be supported on all six Blink platforms (Windows, Mac, > Linux, Chrome OS, Android, and Android WebView)? > > No - This OT is only for desktop, as this was the only platform where SABs > have been available without COOP/COEP. > > Android re-enabled SABs gated behind COOP/COEP: > https://chromestatus.com/feature/5171863141482496 > > Tracking bug > > https://bugs.chromium.org/p/chromium/issues/detail?id=1144104 > > Launch bug > > https://bugs.chromium.org/p/chromium/issues/detail?id=1138860 > > Blink-dev Thread > > Planning isolation requirements (COOP/COEP) for SharedArrayBuffer > <https://groups.google.com/a/chromium.org/g/blink-dev/c/_0MEXs6TJhg/m/QzWOGv7pAQAJ> > > I2S > <https://groups.google.com/a/chromium.org/g/blink-dev/c/1NKvbIj3dq4/m/nLcgUst-BQAJ> > > Link to entry on the Chrome Platform Status > > https://chromestatus.com/feature/4570991992766464 > > -- > 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/CAMKsNvqRwzmSs2%3DPEEhze175Sf7wm6S_AnGuAOnrcZ0mmA1gYw%40mail.gmail.com > <https://groups.google.com/a/chromium.org/d/msgid/blink-dev/CAMKsNvqRwzmSs2%3DPEEhze175Sf7wm6S_AnGuAOnrcZ0mmA1gYw%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/CAFUtAY_rigCWtvtfQxRRh_oFpATkMKn1_S0Hh-R%2Bvdri%2B0aaEA%40mail.gmail.com.
