https://github.com/w3c-fedid/multi-idp/blob/main/README.md
PR will be written for https://w3c-fedid.github.io/FedCM/
Allows FedCM to show multiple identity providers in the same dialog. This provides developers with a convenient way to present all supported identity providers to users. We are planning to first tackle the simple case of having all providers in the same get() call.
https://github.com/w3ctag/design-reviews/issues/803
Pending
FedCM Multiple Identity Providers
FedCmMultipleIdentityProviders
kFedCmMultipleIdentityProviders
This should not have additional interop risks on top of the existing FedCM API which is generally supported but not yet implemented by Firefox and Safari.
Gecko: No signal (https://github.com/mozilla/standards-positions/issues/730) but we have heard positive feedback that this is needed for FedCM
WebKit: Closed Without a Position (https://github.com/WebKit/standards-positions/issues/120)
Web developers: Positive (https://github.com/w3c-fedid/multi-idp/issues/2)
Using this API will just require expanding the get() to use more providers, so it will benefit from the ergonomics of the initial FedCM API.
The main activation issue is having to include all IDPs in the same get() call, which is tough because IDPs generally are independent from each other. That said, solving this problem has been proved to be very challenging, and we do have developers who can use the single get() call, so we wish to start with the simpler version of multi IDP support.
The security considerations are similar to those of the single IDP case. We do not require users to input usernames and passwords for spoofing concerns, and we also have input protection to prevent accidental click right after the UI is shown.
Does this intent deprecate or change behavior of existing APIs, such that it has potentially high risk for Android WebView-based applications?
Gather UX feedback and determine whether the API shape is sufficient for use cases where multiple IdPs can collaborate in a single JS call.
Our partner remains committed to experimentation and they have been working with their relying parties to experiment, but this has taken longer than expected.
None
The debug tools are similar to that of original FedCM: console messages and DevTools issues. Seeing FedCM network requests is not supported in DevTools but can be achieved via net-export.
No
As with the initial FedCM, we do not support Android WebView.
Yes
FedCmMultiIdp
FedCmMultipleIdentityProviders
True
https://bugs.chromium.org/p/chromium/issues/detail?id=1348262
https://launch.corp.google.com/launch/4229762
https://chromestatus.com/feature/5067784766095360?gate=4898496946372608
Intent to Experiment: https://groups.google.com/a/chromium.org/d/msgid/blink-dev/9c4ae5a9-5f36-4421-82c6-07b676ef768cn%40chromium.org
This intent message was generated by Chrome Platform Status.
Just to clarify: you're requesting a renewal for 3 milestones (thus, 133 - 135 inclusive), correct?
Also, can you comment on progress made for the following (from
https://www.chromium.org/blink/launching-features/#origin-trials)?
Draft spec (early draft is ok, but must be spec-like and
associated with the appropriate standardization venue, or WICG)
TAG review (see exceptions)
bit.ly/blink-signals requests
Outreach for feedback from the spec community
WPT tests
--
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+...@chromium.org.
To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/a/chromium.org/d/msgid/blink-dev/eeb64bec-d48b-4479-8f89-c7a4054b906fn%40chromium.org.
Just to clarify: you're requesting a renewal for 3 milestones (thus, 133 - 135 inclusive), correct?
Also, can you comment on progress made for the following (from https://www.chromium.org/blink/launching-features/#origin-trials)?
Draft spec (early draft is ok, but must be spec-like and associated with the appropriate standardization venue, or WICG)
TAG review (see exceptions)
bit.ly/blink-signals requests
Outreach for feedback from the spec community
WPT tests
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to blink-dev+unsubscribe@chromium.org.
On 12/9/24 11:33 PM, Nicolás Peña wrote:
On Monday, December 9, 2024 at 8:06:47 AM UTC-5 Mike Taylor wrote:
Just to clarify: you're requesting a renewal for 3 milestones (thus, 133 - 135 inclusive), correct?
I was hoping to extend to 136, but I am now seeing each request is extended for 3 milestones at a time so 135 is OK.
Also, can you comment on progress made for the following (from https://www.chromium.org/blink/launching-features/#origin-trials)?
Draft spec (early draft is ok, but must be spec-like and associated with the appropriate standardization venue, or WICG)
No update. Latest draft was https://github.com/w3c-fedid/FedCM/pull/438. This is outdated though, so I'll need to create a new PR for this. Is this a blocker for the extension?
TAG review (see exceptions)
No update. The TAG review is open and they have not said anything.bit.ly/blink-signals requests
Mozilla https://github.com/mozilla/standards-positions/issues/730 still open but positive comment.
Apple https://github.com/WebKit/standards-positions/issues/120 closed as duplicate of the general FedCM one, which is still open.Outreach for feedback from the spec community
I don't know what this means.
Thank you!
LGTM to extend for 3 milestones from M133 to M135 inclusive.