The API Proposal linked as the explainer
<https://github.com/w3c/secure-payment-confirmation/issues/290#issuecomment-3806454419>
includes
background on the problem, the value of solving it, and alternative APIs
that were considered. Was there something specific that you were looking
for in a separate explainer that wouldn't just paraphrase the API proposal?

On Mon, Mar 16, 2026 at 2:51 PM Alex Russell <[email protected]>
wrote:

> The API (as I understand it from the comment that's linked in lieu of an
> Explainer) is gated by a Promise, so that gives us a chance to retrofit
> with other checks in the future.
>
> I'd be happier with an FYI to the TAG if there were a real Explainer that
> describes the value of the problem being solved and the alternatives that
> were considered. Is it possible to get one of those?
>
> Best,
>
> Alex
>
> On Wednesday, March 11, 2026 at 9:02:38 AM UTC-7 Darwin Yang wrote:
>
>> Given that this is a new capability we're shipping first, why isn't a TAG
>>> review applicable?
>>
>> Looking at the Webauthn GetClientCapabilities API
>> <https://chromestatus.com/feature/5128205875544064?gate=5206408640069632> 
>> which
>> is similar to this, they were able to FYI their TAG review
>> <https://github.com/w3ctag/design-reviews/issues/1016>. If I were to get
>> one, I was wondering if I could do the same.
>>
>> On Wed, Mar 11, 2026 at 10:17 AM Darwin Yang <[email protected]>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> Just to confirm, access to this API is gated behind a user-initiated
>>>> flow? That is, we don't create any additional fingerprinting risk until
>>>> such time as the user is attempting a transaction?
>>>
>>> No, it is not gated behind a user-initiated flow but as mentioned in the
>>> privacy review, the TPM detection as a fingerprinting vector is already
>>> possible without this ne API.
>>>
>>> Given that this is a new capability we're shipping first, why isn't a
>>>> TAG review applicable?
>>>
>>> Although this is a new API, the ability to get this information (BBK
>>> availability) is not new and can be obtained through the SPC payment
>>> request show method. This would be similar to the SPC availability API
>>> <https://chromestatus.com/feature/5165040614768640>.
>>>
>>> On Wed, Mar 11, 2026 at 1:59 AM Yoav Weiss (@Shopify) <
>>> [email protected]> wrote:
>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Tue, Mar 10, 2026 at 3:23 PM Chromestatus <
>>>> [email protected]> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> *Contact emails*
>>>>> [email protected]
>>>>>
>>>>> *Explainer*
>>>>>
>>>>> https://github.com/w3c/secure-payment-confirmation/issues/290#issuecomment-3806454419
>>>>>
>>>>> *Specification*
>>>>>
>>>>> https://w3c.github.io/secure-payment-confirmation/#sctn-secure-payment-confirmation-capabilities
>>>>>
>>>>> *Design docs*
>>>>>
>>>>> https://www.w3.org/wbs/83744/spc-mvp-2025/results
>>>>>
>>>>> https://github.com/w3c/secure-payment-confirmation/issues/290#issuecomment-3806454419
>>>>> https://www.w3.org/2026/01/29-wpwg-minutes.html#3919
>>>>> https://www.w3.org/2026/02/26-wpwg-minutes.html#bbkdetect
>>>>>
>>>>> *Summary*
>>>>> Adds a new static method to the Payment Request that allows web
>>>>> developers to get the capabilities of the browser's implementation of
>>>>> Secure Payment Confirmation. This helps web developers to easily know what
>>>>> capabilities are available for Secure Payment Confirmation so they can
>>>>> decide whether or not they want to use Secure Payment Confirmation with
>>>>> those capabilities.
>>>>>
>>>>> *Blink component*
>>>>> Blink>Payments
>>>>> <https://issues.chromium.org/issues?q=customfield1222907:%22Blink%3EPayments%22>
>>>>>
>>>>> *Web Feature ID*
>>>>> secure-payment-confirmation
>>>>> <https://webstatus.dev/features/secure-payment-confirmation>
>>>>>
>>>>> *Motivation*
>>>>> This feature allows web developers to check for which capabilities are
>>>>> supported in the browser's implementation of Secure Payment Confirmation.
>>>>> Web developers want an easy way to check whether hardware browser bound
>>>>> keys are available with the Secure Payment Confirmation API and only use
>>>>> the API if if they are available. Without this method, web developers 
>>>>> would
>>>>> need to initiate the Secure Payment Confirmation flow and force users to 
>>>>> go
>>>>> through the dialog and authenticate just to ignore the data returned if it
>>>>> did not contain the browser bound key (in cases where browser bound keys
>>>>> are not available).
>>>>>
>>>>> *Initial public proposal*
>>>>>
>>>>> https://github.com/w3c/secure-payment-confirmation/issues/290#issuecomment-3806454419
>>>>>
>>>>> *Search tags*
>>>>> spc <http:///features#tags:spc>, bbk <http:///features#tags:bbk>
>>>>>
>>>>> *TAG review*
>>>>> *No information provided*
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> *Given that this is a new capability we're shipping first, why isn't a
>>>> TAG review applicable?*
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> *TAG review status*
>>>>> Not applicable
>>>>>
>>>>> *Risks*
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> *Interoperability and Compatibility*
>>>>> The GetSecurePaymentConfirmationCapabilities method is new and the
>>>>> only risk is if other browser do not implement it.
>>>>>
>>>>> *Gecko*: No signal (
>>>>> https://github.com/mozilla/standards-positions/issues/570) Firefox
>>>>> haven't implemented SPC yet so this new method is not relevant.
>>>>>
>>>>> *WebKit*: No signal (
>>>>> https://github.com/WebKit/standards-positions/issues/30) Safari
>>>>> haven't implemented SPC yet so this new method is not relevant.
>>>>>
>>>>> *Web developers*: Positive (
>>>>> https://www.w3.org/2026/01/29-wpwg-minutes.html#3919) Discussed the
>>>>> GetSecurePaymentConfirmationCapabilities method during the WPWG when
>>>>> proposing a solution to Browser Bound Key Feature Detection and did not
>>>>> receive any comments opposed to this feature.
>>>>>
>>>>> *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?
>>>>> *No information provided*
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> *Debuggability*
>>>>> Web developers should be able to inspect the output of the new method
>>>>> which is defined in WebIDL, thus no changes are needed in devtools.
>>>>>
>>>>> *Will this feature be supported on all six Blink platforms (Windows,
>>>>> Mac, Linux, ChromeOS, Android, and Android WebView)?*
>>>>> No
>>>>> The GetSecurePaymentConfirmationCapabilities method will only be added
>>>>> to platforms that support Secure Payment Confirmation which are currently
>>>>> only Android, macOS, and Windows.
>>>>>
>>>>> *Is this feature fully tested by web-platform-tests
>>>>> <https://chromium.googlesource.com/chromium/src/+/main/docs/testing/web_platform_tests.md>?*
>>>>> No
>>>>> Web platform tests are in development. We can only test if the method
>>>>> is available and can be called as user agents have the ability to omit
>>>>> capabilities (for privacy reasons).
>>>>>
>>>>> *Flag name on about://flags*
>>>>> *No information provided*
>>>>>
>>>>> *Finch feature name*
>>>>> SecurePaymentConfirmationCapabilities
>>>>>
>>>>> *Rollout plan*
>>>>> Will ship enabled for all users
>>>>>
>>>>> *Requires code in //chrome?*
>>>>> False
>>>>>
>>>>> *Tracking bug*
>>>>> https://crbug.com/484043990
>>>>>
>>>>> *Launch bug*
>>>>> https://launch.corp.google.com/launch/4448199
>>>>>
>>>>> *Measurement*
>>>>> A new GetSecurePaymentConfirmationCapabilities UseCounter will be
>>>>> created and used.
>>>>>
>>>>> *Availability expectation*
>>>>> The GetSecurePaymentConfirmationCapabilities method will only be
>>>>> available in Chromium browsers for the foreseeable future.
>>>>>
>>>>> *Estimated milestones*
>>>>> Shipping on desktop 147
>>>>> Shipping on Android 147
>>>>>
>>>>> *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).
>>>>> *No information provided*
>>>>>
>>>>> *Link to entry on the Chrome Platform Status*
>>>>> https://chromestatus.com/feature/4727235745546240?gate=4769560794365952
>>>>>
>>>>> *Links to previous Intent discussions*
>>>>> Intent to Prototype:
>>>>> https://groups.google.com/a/chromium.org/d/msgid/blink-dev/69a0a6a7.050a0220.3c921b.02ae.GAE%40google.com
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> 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 [email protected].
>>>>> To view this discussion visit
>>>>> https://groups.google.com/a/chromium.org/d/msgid/blink-dev/69b02941.710a0220.50957.0104.GAE%40google.com
>>>>> <https://groups.google.com/a/chromium.org/d/msgid/blink-dev/69b02941.710a0220.50957.0104.GAE%40google.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 [email protected].
To view this discussion visit 
https://groups.google.com/a/chromium.org/d/msgid/blink-dev/CAGben6nyyeysOYY3RUTbi%2BnbdGbTP90nJb8qS%3DGw%3Dk8jjcv4Jw%40mail.gmail.com.

Reply via email to