Thanks Kenneth! Given the feedback from Whereby (thanks Andreas!) and the aggregated origin trial feedback that Ajay shared I think we should ship this, just a few more notes/questions.
Please do what you think makes sense with the naming. I think there's a case for renaming, but it's up to you and doesn't block shipping IMO. Taking a look at https://wpt.fyi/results/compute-pressure I see that most of the tests are tentative. Should they still be, or why doesn't the spec cover so much of the behavior? On Fri, Mar 15, 2024 at 10:04 AM Kenneth Rohde Christiansen < kenneth.christian...@gmail.com> wrote: > Thanks Philip! > > I commented on the issue you created, but I don't feel strongly about > any of the options as it is easy to convert from one to the other. We > looked at it before and decided to not change it then, but we are open > to good arguments so please chime in. > > On Thu, Mar 14, 2024 at 11:51 PM Philip Jägenstedt <foo...@chromium.org> > wrote: > > > > Thank you for sharing aggregated feedback, Ajay. > > > > I couldn't find any discussion about sampleRate vs an interval, so I've > filed https://github.com/w3c/compute-pressure/issues/253 with all the > precedent for and against that I could find. > > > > Kenneth, Arnaud, can you look into this and decide whether to rename or > not? > > > > On Wed, Mar 6, 2024 at 5:31 PM 'Ajay Rahatekar' via blink-dev < > blink-dev@chromium.org> wrote: > >> > >> Please see below for aggregated and manually vetted OT feedback that > was shared as per Google's policy: > >> > >> 100% of the respondents are extremely likely to continue using the API. > >> 43% of the respondents found the API 'Extremely easy', 43% found it > 'Neither easy nor difficult' and 14% found it 'Moderately easy' to use. > >> 7% of the respondents mentioned that they would prefer to give the > callback frequency in time units (secs, milliseconds), similar to other > APIs such as setInterval in place of Hz as currently designed. A number > scale along with labels would be more useful e.g. { pressure: 2, label: > 'nominal' }. > >> 2% of the respondents suggested adjusting thresholds or combining > states to reduce "flapping" between fair and nominal > >> > >> > >> > >> -Ajay > >> On Wednesday, March 6, 2024 at 7:22:39 AM UTC-8 yoav...@chromium.org > wrote: > >>> > >>> On Wed, Mar 6, 2024 at 4:00 PM 'Ajay Rahatekar' via blink-dev < > blin...@chromium.org> wrote: > >>>> > >>>> As Kenneth mentioned, the aggregated/anonymized feedback (largely > positive) was shared with the Intel team in consultation with the Google > Privacy team. Internal copy is available as needed. > >>> > >>> > >>> While a Google-internal copy is great, a public summary of that > feedback would be useful for non-Google API owners and the broader > community alike, and help us get a better understanding of the benefits of > shipping this. > >>> > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> On Wednesday, March 6, 2024 at 5:57:47 AM UTC-8 > kenneth.ch...@gmail.com wrote: > >>>>> > >>>>> On Tue, Mar 5, 2024 at 7:14 PM Reilly Grant <rei...@chromium.org> > wrote: > >>>>>> > >>>>>> On Tue, Mar 5, 2024 at 5:56 AM Mike Taylor <mike...@chromium.org> > wrote: > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> During this origin trial we realized that the full capacity of the > API couldn’t be tested due to a lack of support for third-party tokens. An > Origin Trial extension was necessary until M123. > >>>>>> > >>>>>> Is there any developer feedback that can be shared from the origin > trials? I'm looking for signals that developers have been able to improve > user experiences by using the new signals. > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> Though we cannot share the exact feedback from the origin trial due > to confidentiality (we also only got a summary ourselves as non-Googlers), > the feedback was quite positive with all respondents extremely likely to > continue using the API. None of the respondents found the API hard to use, > but we received some minor feedback on the API shape and feature requests > that we have adopted or at least filed issues for. > >>>>> > >>>>> Ajay (cc'ed), might be able to share more. > >>>>> > >>>>> Kenneth > >>>> > >>>> -- > >>>> > >>>> 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+...@chromium.org. > >>>> > >>>> To view this discussion on the web visit > https://groups.google.com/a/chromium.org/d/msgid/blink-dev/143ee50c-9ff4-4dfb-860c-700155bcd065n%40chromium.org > . > >> > >> -- > >> 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/36e63e65-9326-4f5f-8fa0-b1e512e53394n%40chromium.org > . > > > > -- > Kenneth Rohde Christiansen > Web Platform Architect, Intel Corporation. > Phone +45 4294 9458 <+45%2042%2094%2094%2058> ﹆﹆﹆ > -- 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/CAARdPYdkfp%3DV8_dEGvFiwiHehHdWE1z8jLVYz_cvtZC%3D4m69%3Dw%40mail.gmail.com.
