| 03:54 | <annevk> | Ah that is correct, because the parser doesn't call mutation events. |
| 06:20 | <freddy> | thank you to all the note takers of yesterday's WHATWG sessions. was very easy to catch up on the stuff I missed 🙏 |
| 09:36 | <annevk> | Joint session with a11y is starting. Minutes are still at https://docs.google.com/document/d/1V6_s_VsaWcI9J-ZATbIKKijn59JbVmRMsHXYyH29sho/edit |
| 09:39 | <Panos Astithas> | Slides are here: https://github.com/whatwg/meta/issues/284#issuecomment-1720877381 |
| 09:52 | <Sam Sneddon [:gsnedders]> | do we have a generic term for the combination of a storage partition, network cache partition, etc.? as seen in ephemeral sessions in most implementations, for example. |
| 09:54 | <annevk> | Sam Sneddon [:gsnedders]: we have a URL: https://privacycg.github.io/storage-partitioning/ |
| 09:54 | <annevk> | I personally prefer "state partitioning", but I didn't actually rename all the things |
| 10:01 | <Sam Sneddon [:gsnedders]> | a quick skim makes it sound like a "storage partition" is more than just that, it's more like (isPrivate, profile, site, origin) etc.? |
| 10:05 | <Sam Sneddon [:gsnedders]> | like I guess I want something that covers (isPrivate, browserProfile), and then within that storage area you have further partitions (per site, etc.)? |
| 10:11 | <annevk> | Sam Sneddon [:gsnedders]: I see, https://infra.spec.whatwg.org/#user-agent made an attempt at that particular distinction |
| 10:12 | <annevk> | Sam Sneddon [:gsnedders]: not sure it has everything you need, Jeffrey Yasskin might be able to help |
| 10:12 | <Jeffrey Yasskin> | Sam Sneddon [:gsnedders]: Yeah, I was trying to say that different profiles are entirely different user agents. |
| 10:12 | <Jeffrey Yasskin> | And then the user agent has various storage partitions. |
| 10:13 | <Sam Sneddon [:gsnedders]> | Even if they co-exist in a single browser UI process? |
| 10:13 | <Sam Sneddon [:gsnedders]> | Because that gives you multiple UAs in a single browser process, which seems… wild, terminology wise. |
| 10:14 | <Jeffrey Yasskin> | Yes, because the policies that control them could be very different, and no web-side information should flow between them. |
| 10:15 | <Jeffrey Yasskin> | It's a spec construct, kinda like we abstract process boundaries into "agent clusters". So look at the observable implications, rather than assuming things about process boundaries. |
| 10:16 | <Jeffrey Yasskin> | It's also totally possible that I overlooked a bigger problem with that arrangement, so feel free to point that out. :) |
| 10:17 | <Sam Sneddon [:gsnedders]> | (The context here is wanting to be able to have some control of, uh, user agents within an implementation under WebDriver BiDi. Which probably means refactoring a lot of the terminology in that spec.) |
| 10:17 | <Sam Sneddon [:gsnedders]> | I think for WebDriver BiDi we're going to have to clarify when we're talking about the local end implementation, the remote end implementation, any intermediary node implementations, and the implementation [infra]. |
| 10:18 | <Jeffrey Yasskin> | Cool, yeah, I wasn't thinking about the WebDriver implications when I wrote that. |
| 10:19 | <Jeffrey Yasskin> | Does WebDriver want to make a single connection that covers multiple profiles? I would have expected that you'd make a WebDriver connection to a single profile, and so its spec could talk about connecting to an Infra user agent. |
| 10:20 | <Sam Sneddon [:gsnedders]> | That is what the current WG discussion is about. 🙃 |
| 10:20 | <Jeffrey Yasskin> | Do you want me to come over? |
| 10:20 | <Ms2ger> | [vaguely threatening] |
| 10:20 | <Jeffrey Yasskin> | lol |
| 10:20 | <Sam Sneddon [:gsnedders]> | You're a bit too late. And probably mostly this is just a spec text question, rather than worthwhile having in the WG? |
| 10:21 | <Jeffrey Yasskin> | SG. Yeah, I hope the Infra term helps the WebDriver spec make all the relevant distinctions, and that any necessary spec changes actually make useful clarifications. |
| 10:21 | <Sam Sneddon [:gsnedders]> | (CDP has this ability, and Puppeteer would like this to be possible with WebDriver BiDi, because it provides a decent performance win to avoid having to create a many new browsers while being able to run tests in parallel largely isolated.) |
| 10:42 | <Jeffrey Yasskin> | From the in-person meeting: https://arasaac.org/ and https://www.blissymbolics.org/ |
| 10:45 | <Jeffrey Yasskin> | Oh, and https://www.w3.org/WAI/adapt/ |
| 10:49 | <Panos Astithas> | https://github.com/w3c/adapt/issues/240 |
| 10:57 | <littledan> | sorry where is the queue maintained? |
| 10:58 | <annevk> | In the google doc. |
| 10:58 | <annevk> | I put you on it. |
| 11:08 | <muan> | Captured the steps for SFNSP APIs, hopefully this address some of the concerns raised: https://github.com/whatwg/html/issues/5326#issuecomment-1721091809 |
| 11:09 | <hsivonen> | AFAICT, the gap analysis does not compare with IPA directly, so it's an exercise to the reader to see what requirements IPA covers. |
| 11:09 | <hsivonen> | Or am I missing something? |
| 12:47 | <annevk> | https://github.com/whatwg/meta/pull/295 If you want to be on the perf team, please say so (and share your GitHub ID) |
| 14:15 | <smaug> | https://github.com/WICG/scheduling-apis/issues/67 |
| 14:32 | <Domenic> | https://github.com/whatwg/html/labels/agenda%2B |
| 15:24 | <Domenic> | https://github.com/whatwg/html/issues/4500 |
| 19:10 | <sefeng> | annevk: I forgot to ask you about this at TPAC - do you know whether Safari provides some opt-in/opt-out mechanism for Reporting API? |