Hey Mason, This looks good, but I'm not sure I understand the plan. Is it to deprecate (w/ console warnings) for some period of time? Are you going to propose a reverse-OT? Or removal once usage falls below some threshold?
Best, Alex On Thursday, March 6, 2025 at 5:20:03 PM UTC-8 Mason Freed wrote: > On Tue, Mar 4, 2025 at 7:46 PM Vladimir Levin <vmp...@chromium.org> wrote: > >> Re TAG: I don't believe we need a TAG review for deprecations or removals. > > > Great, thanks for confirming. > > >> On Tuesday, March 4, 2025 at 8:54:00 PM UTC-5 Domenic Denicola wrote: >> >> It wasn't clear to me that this was just in the initial "deprecate" >> stage, not the "remove" stage: I wish ChromeStatus tooling separated those >> more cleanly (like it does Dev Trial vs. Ship). Given that you're still in >> the preparatory deprecation stage, this level of detail seems fine! >> >> > +1. I used to edit the subject like to say "Intent to Deprecate" (i.e. > remove the "and Remove") but that broke some of the tooling, so now I don't > touch it. But I do wish the descriptions changed to say "deprecation" > instead of "dev trial" and "remove" instead of "ship". > > >> I do think a short explainer-like thing will be desirable before we get >> to the removal stage. Maybe just a few paragraphs detailing what's >> changing, what impact it might have on developers, and how they can adapt. >> Hopefully Mozilla can help put that together. A reasonable place for that >> to live would be the top message of the spec PR. >> >> > Sure, that makes sense. I think at that point there might be more data to > pull into the explainer also. > > >> Interoperability and Compatibility >> >> Use counters are relatively high: https://chromestatus.com/ >> metrics/feature/timeline/popularity/4272 However, analysis from Mozilla >> shows that perhaps the impact is not as large as the use counters would >> suggest: https://github.com/whatwg/html/issues/7867#issuecomment- >> 2595987424 >> >> >> For posterity, it looks like about 0.6% of page loads would be affected, >> and that seems to have a gradual trend up. >> >> A deprecation seems fine here. What do you estimate a removal timeline to >> be? Ideally we can reduce the usecounters as much as we can before a >> removal. >> > > I agree, it'd be nice to see the use counters go down before that, but I > always notice that deprecating things seems to make usage go up. I don't > have a great estimate for the removal timeline - I'm following Mozilla's > lead on this, and ideally they turn it off by default first for a while, > before Blink does. Sorry I don't have a more definite schedule! > > >> Again for posterity, it seems like there was a single report about this, >> which was fixed on the author's side: >> https://mastodon.social/@zcorpan/113843744254923492 >> > > Yep, thanks. > > On Wed, Mar 5, 2025 at 8:00 AM Daniel Bratell <bratel...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> Use counter is 0.6% but judging from the comment >> https://github.com/whatwg/html/issues/7867#issuecomment-1977647444 the >> effect seems smaller. Of 30-ish sites investigated there, 15 were >> unaffected and the rest had seemingly minor changes. >> >> The high counter might be because linkedin triggers it, and linkedin was >> seemingly not affected. >> >> This does not mean that it's safe to remove the slightly (to me) >> unexpected quirk, but it might be. >> > Unclear to me also, but I'm hopeful. > > Thanks, everyone! > > Mason > > >> *WebKit*: Positive (https://github.com/whatwg/ >> html/issues/7867#issuecomment-2124317504) This isn't a standards >> position, just a github comment. >> >> *Web developers*: No signals No signals >> >> *Other signals*: >> >> 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 >> >> None >> >> >> Is this feature fully tested by web-platform-tests >> <https://chromium.googlesource.com/chromium/src/+/main/docs/testing/web_platform_tests.md> >> ?Yes >> >> https://wpt.fyi/results/html/rendering/non-replaced- >> elements/sections-and-headings >> >> >> Flag name on about://flagsNone >> >> Finch feature nameNone >> >> Non-finch justification >> >> No Finch flag yet - this is just at the "Intent to Deprecate" stage, not >> the "Removal" stage. Only warnings will be shown for now. >> >> >> Requires code in //chrome?False >> >> Tracking bughttps://issues.chromium.org/issues/394111284 >> >> Estimated milestonesDevTrial on desktop136DevTrial on Android136 >> >> Link to entry on the Chrome Platform Statushttps://chromestatus.com/ >> feature/6192419898654720?gate=5420483144843264 >> >> This intent message was generated by Chrome Platform Status >> <https://chromestatus.com/>. >> >> On Tue, Mar 4, 2025 at 3:47 PM Jason Robbins <jrobb...@google.com> wrote: >> >> Oh, and to clarify, I was suggesting that you could copy using the small >> copy-icon button and paste it on this thread as a reply. Don't start a new >> blink-dev thread or use the "Post directly to blink-dev" button (because >> that will start a new thread). >> >> Thanks, >> jason! >> >> On Tuesday, March 4, 2025 at 3:43:34 PM UTC-8 Jason Robbins wrote: >> >> The kicker: the chromestatus tool only gives you one shot at creating the >> intent email. Now that I've done it once, that button is gone. In order to >> send another email, it seems that I'd have to create an entirely new >> chromestatus entry, and I'm loath to do that. Let me know if it's enough to >> point you to the chromestatus page itself >> <https://chromestatus.com/feature/6192419898654720> to see the updated >> sections? Sorry. >> >> >> Mason, here's a link to the intent preview page for this feature entry >> that you could copy again: >> https://chromestatus.com/feature/6192419898654720/gate/ >> 5420483144843264/intent >> >> ChromeStatus doesn't offer that button after the intent thread is >> detected simply because we reuse that UI area to show review status info, >> which is typically the next step in the process. However, that button is >> just a link to the intent preview page, and it is always available if you >> fill in the feature ID and gate ID. Of course, any copy-and-pasted email >> can fall out of date, and it only has a subset of the feature entry fields, >> so reviewers should make use of the full feature entry as needed. >> >> Thanks, >> jason! >> >> >> -- 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 visit https://groups.google.com/a/chromium.org/d/msgid/blink-dev/825f55e2-1f1d-4cec-a371-13c4a73f2b47n%40chromium.org.
