On Wed, May 20, 2026 at 8:00 AM Yoav Weiss (@Shopify) <
[email protected]> wrote:

> Oh, and can you also ask for a debuggability review?
>

Done


>
> On Wed, May 20, 2026 at 4:58 PM Yoav Weiss (@Shopify) <
> [email protected]> wrote:
>
>> LGTM to experiment M150-M153 inclusive (but please merge the explainers
>> to avoid confusion :D)
>>
>
Will do.


>
>> On Wed, May 20, 2026 at 4:35 PM Sam Goto <[email protected]> wrote:
>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On Wed, May 20, 2026, 4:46 AM Yoav Weiss (@Shopify) <
>>> [email protected]> wrote:
>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Wednesday, May 20, 2026 at 2:02:14 AM UTC+2 Sam Goto wrote:
>>>>
>>>> *Contact emails*
>>>> [email protected]
>>>>
>>>> *Explainer*
>>>> https://github.com/samuelgoto/email-verification-protocol
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Why not https://github.com/WICG/email-verification-protocol ?
>>>> I see that those two explainers are different.. What's preventing
>>>> aligning them?
>>>>
>>>
>>> Ah, just a fork that I'm working on getting merged into the main branch.
>>> There was a batch of changes that we made recently (mostly on non-normative
>>> text) that we didn't have the time yet to review. But yeah, it should be
>>> momentarily merged into the WICG repo.
>>>
>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> *Specification*
>>>> Per TAG feedback, we broke the specification into two parts:
>>>> An IETF backend specification here: https://dickhardt.
>>>> github.io/email-verification/draft-hardt-email-verification.html
>>>> And a corresponding W3C frontend specification which we will provide as
>>>> we go through the Origin Trial and see the API design settle.
>>>>
>>>> *Demos*
>>>> https://code.sgo.to/2024/10/25/verified-email-autocomplete.html
>>>>
>>>> *Summary*
>>>> EVP (email verification protocol) helps users create, access and
>>>> recover accounts by providing cryptographic proof of ownership seamlessly
>>>> rather than email OTPs manually. It requires website authors, email
>>>> providers and browsers to participate.
>>>>
>>>> *Blink component*
>>>> Blink>Identity
>>>> <https://issues.chromium.org/issues?q=customfield1222907:%22Blink%3EIdentity%22>
>>>>
>>>> *Web Feature ID*
>>>> Missing feature
>>>>
>>>> *TAG review*
>>>> https://github.com/w3ctag/design-reviews/issues/1169
>>>>
>>>> One of the main pieces of feedback was to take part of the spec to IETF
>>>> (which would be able to assess parts of the proposal better), which we took
>>>> by writing and circulating the following draft, as well as starting to find
>>>> the appropriate groups for broader review: https://dickhardt.
>>>> github.io/email-verification/draft-hardt-email-verification.html
>>>>
>>>> *TAG review status*
>>>> We requested an early TAG review and got an "ambivalent". We will
>>>> request another TAG review or reopen it as the design settles.
>>>>
>>>> *Goals for experimentation*
>>>> There is much that we'd like to learn in origin trials, because there
>>>> are multiple moving parts here.
>>>>
>>>> First, we'd like to gather evidence of developer demand and API
>>>> fitness: is autocomplete a good entry point? what kinds of forms and UXs
>>>> are out there? does the benefit developers get outweigh the cost of
>>>> implementation?
>>>>
>>>> Second, we'd like to gather evidence if email providers are
>>>> incentivized too. What's in it for them? Is the backend API appropriate?
>>>>
>>>> Third, we'd like to gather data on how users interact with the UX
>>>> implementation: will users accept the prompt? do they expect the token to
>>>> be shared during form submission or email selection?
>>>>
>>>> Fourth, we'd love to learn if other browsers empathize with the user
>>>> and ecosystem pain too, and if the implementation choices we made are
>>>> transferable to their architectures too.
>>>>
>>>> Fifth, more broadly, email verification is at the center of a lot of
>>>> identity flows, so we'd like to learn how it might relate to other
>>>> mechanisms, such as federation, phone number verification and
>>>> password/passkey management.
>>>>
>>>> *Risks*
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> *Interoperability and Compatibility*
>>>> *No information provided*
>>>>
>>>> *Gecko*: Defer (https://github.com/mozilla/standards-positions/
>>>> issues/1316) We filed for an early review before we had all of the
>>>> information for Mozilla to make a proper assessment. We think we understand
>>>> the proposal better now than we did 6 months ago, so we are planning to
>>>> re-open the standard position request and try to offer some of the clarity
>>>> that was lacking.
>>>>
>>>> *WebKit*: No signal (https://github.com/WebKit/standards-positions/
>>>> issues/578) We haven't formally gotten a review from Webkit, but we
>>>> got some informal feedback last TPAC with their preference to augment
>>>> WebOTP / one-time-codes and OTPs and activate IMAP clients (of which there
>>>> are fewer) rather than email providers. We believe this alternative isn't
>>>> necessarily mutually exclusive and can work symbiotically with what's being
>>>> proposed. We expanded on that here: https://github.com/
>>>> samuelgoto/email-verification-protocol#webotp-otps-vs-evts-and-imap
>>>>
>>>> *Web developers*: Positive This API requires participation by websites
>>>> and email providers. We successfully ran a devtrial with a few partners
>>>> which we expect will join us running an original trial. Based on what we
>>>> heard so far, we are optimistic this will hit a sweet spot with website
>>>> authors, but  we'd like to gather further evidence of developer demand and
>>>> API fitness in an actual production setup.
>>>>
>>>> *Other signals*:
>>>>
>>>> *Ergonomics*
>>>> We think a declarative autocomplete API strikes the right balance for
>>>> developers and users. There are a series of other variations that we have
>>>> explored and are open to revisiting based on developer feedback that we
>>>> listed here: https://github.com/samuelgoto/email-verification-
>>>> protocol#website-api
>>>>
>>>> *Activation*
>>>> This proposal requires incentivizing and changing websites, email
>>>> providers, browsers and, to a smaller extent, user behavior. Much of the
>>>> incentives are going to be pulled by the availability of email providers,
>>>> which we think might be feasible to bootstrap. More on the economics here:
>>>> https://github.com/samuelgoto/email-verification-protocol#
>>>> activation-considerations
>>>>
>>>> *Security*
>>>> https://github.com/samuelgoto/email-verification-protocol#
>>>> security-considerations
>>>>
>>>> *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*
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> *Ongoing technical constraints*
>>>> *No information provided*
>>>>
>>>> *Debuggability*
>>>> Still being developed. Basic error messages in the developer console
>>>> available.
>>>>
>>>> *Will this feature be supported on all six Blink platforms (Windows,
>>>> Mac, Linux, ChromeOS, Android, and Android WebView)?*
>>>> No. We are planning to start on desktop first and then introduce
>>>> Android. We aren't sure if it would be possible/useful to support WebView.
>>>>
>>>> *Is this feature fully tested by web-platform-tests
>>>> <https://chromium.googlesource.com/chromium/src/+/main/docs/testing/web_platform_tests.md>?*
>>>> Not currently available.
>>>>
>>>> *DevTrial instructions*
>>>> https://github.com/WICG/email-verification-protocol/blob/main/HOWTO.md
>>>>
>>>> *Flag name on about://flags*
>>>> #email-verification-protocol
>>>>
>>>> *Finch feature name*
>>>> *No information provided*
>>>>
>>>> *Non-finch justification*
>>>> *No information provided*
>>>>
>>>> *Requires code in //chrome?*
>>>> True
>>>>
>>>> *Estimated milestones*
>>>> Origin trial desktop first150Origin trial desktop last153
>>>>
>>>> *Link to entry on the Chrome Platform Status*
>>>> https://chromestatus.com/feature/5205725253074944?gate=5146029401964544
>>>>
>>>> *Links to previous Intent discussions*
>>>> Intent to Prototype: https://groups.google.com/a/chromium.org/d/
>>>> msgid/blink-dev/68bb77c8.050a0220.257801.0191.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/CAMtUnc6ZjOCyrfmghXD1h2WiwT%2BzuntCzj7VHVTWH_07Pvp2kQ%40mail.gmail.com.

Reply via email to