Does this intent deprecate or change behavior of existing APIs, such that it has potentially high risk for Android WebView-based applications?
Low. This is strictly additive and behind a feature flag. Android WebView does not expose Web Bluetooth, so the new API is not available there.Does the feature depend on any code or APIs outside the Chromium open source repository and its open-source dependencies to function?
None beyond the platform Bluetooth APIs already used by Chromium's Web Bluetooth implementation: Android BluetoothGatt, CoreBluetooth, WinRT GATT, and BlueZ D-Bus.| Shipping on desktop | 160 |
| Shipping on Android | 160 |
| Shipping on WebView | 160 |
| Shipping on iOS | 160 |
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).
The API shape has converged in WebBluetoothCG PR 672 and the PR is approved. No further substantive changes are anticipated, but the PR must be merged before shipping.--
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/CAFmjHKQBc%2BLCfBhiNC0mAhMDqV2RsvCnE7zvvBzXdg6d6XYC2A%40mail.gmail.com.
Please file a Mozilla standards request for this feature.
Filed: https://github.com/mozilla/standards-positions/issues/1473
will update feature entry as soon theres a response.
Could a WPT be added for this?
Not today. Web Bluetooth WPTs drive fake peripherals through the bluetooth BiDi module in the spec’s Automated testing section, and neither those bluetooth.simulate* commands nor Chromium’s FakeCentral/FakePeripheral know anything about ATT_MTU. A fake device therefore always sits at the default, so there is nothing a test could assert.
Making it testable means an mtu on the GATT connection response plus a simulateGattMtuChange command, specced in that Automated testing section and implemented in the Chromium emulation layer. Happy to do all of it. How would you like it, land the automation commands in the spec first and have the WPTs as a shipping blocker, or ship on the current unit test coverage (web_bluetooth_service_impl_unittest.cc, bluetooth_gatt_bluez_unittest.cc, global-interface-listing) and track the WPTs as a follow-up?
cheers,
helmut