Can you please request the other review bits in ChromeStatus (privacy, security, etc)?
-- Dan On Tuesday, May 6, 2025 at 3:42:02 PM UTC-7 ay...@chromium.org wrote: > Contact emails > > ay...@chromium.org, dom...@chromium.org > > Explainer > > https://github.com/whatwg/webidl/pull/1465 > > Specification > > https://github.com/whatwg/webidl/pull/1465 > > Summary > > Currently, when the web platform wants to tell you when you've exceeded > quota, it will use `DOMException` with the specific `name` property set to > `QuotaExceededError`. However this does not allow carrying additional > information. > > This proposes removing "QuotaExceededError" from the list of built-in > `DOMException` names, and instead creates a class name `QuotaExceededError` > from the list of built-in `DOMException` and has the additional optional > properties `quota` and `requested`. We propose all instances of specs that > throw "QuotaExceededError" `DOMException`s get upgraded to instead throw > `QuotaExceededError`s. For now, such specs would leave the `quota` and > `requested` properties at their default value of `null`, but they could > eventually upgrade to include that data, if it's useful for their use case > (and isn't, e.g., a privacy leak). > > > Blink component > > Blink > <https://issues.chromium.org/issues?q=customfield1222907:%22Blink%22> > > TAG review > > Review request filed & closed > <https://github.com/w3ctag/design-reviews/issues/1065> > > TAG review status > > N/A > > Risks > > Interoperability and Compatibility > > This is technically backward-incompatible with some rare coding patterns. > The spec PR outlines those, and compares them with the more common coding > patterns which work the same even after this change. Given that quota > exceeded exceptions only occur in rare cases anyway, and the most popular > patterns will continue working with no problem, we think the compat risk > here is small. Nevertheless, we'll carefully monitor for breakage, and use > Finch to revert if any serious problems are found. > > We anticipate low interoperability risk, as we suspect that if Chromium > proves that this is web-compatible, other browsers will quickly follow. And > even during the transition period, the most common coding patterns will > work in all browsers. > > > > Gecko: Under consideration ( > https://github.com/mozilla/standards-positions/issues/1223) > > WebKit: Pending (https://github.com/WebKit/standards-positions/issues/468) > > Web developers: No signals > > Other signals: > > Ergonomics > > None > > > Activation > > N/A > > > 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 > > None > > > Will this feature be supported on all six Blink platforms (Windows, Mac, > Linux, ChromeOS, 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> > ? > > To be added here > <https://crsrc.org/c/third_party/blink/web_tests/external/wpt/webidl/ecmascript-binding/es-exceptions/DOMException-constructor-behavior.any.js> > > Flag name on about://flags > > None > > Finch feature name > > QuotaExceededError > > Requires code in //chrome? > > False > > Measurement > > N/A > > Estimated milestones > > M138 > > > 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). > > We haven't yet sent spec PRs to update all specifications to use this new > error type, but that process is pretty mechanical, and we will do so once > we're sure this sticks. We want to avoid badgering 9 separate spec editors > into merging our update PRs, if there's a possibility we'd then have to > badger them to accept 9 separate revert PRs a couple months later. > > > Link to entry on the Chrome Platform Status > > https://chromestatus.com/feature/6194847180128256?gate=5011647107956736 > > 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 blink-dev+unsubscr...@chromium.org. To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/a/chromium.org/d/msgid/blink-dev/5c732e05-9adb-43d8-b8d8-10512643214dn%40chromium.org.
