Intent to Ship: view-timeline shorthand sets view-timeline-inset

[Anders Hartvoll Ruud]

Contact emails

and...@chromium.org

Specification

https://github.com/w3c/csswg-drafts/issues/8926

Summary

The view-timeline shorthand is now a shorthand for view-timeline-name, view-timeline-axis, and view-timeline-inset. Previously, view-timeline-inset was not part of the shorthand.

This can theoretically be a problem if CSS like this exists:

div {

  view-timeline-inset: 10px;

  view-timeline: mytimeline;

}

Currently, view-timeline (appearing later) would not interfere with view-timeline-inset above, whereas with this change the view-timeline declaration sets view-timeline-inset to its initial value.

Use-counters:

• view-timeline: ~0.015%

• view-timeline-inset: ~0.019% 

• No sample sites at the time of writing.

However, for this to be a problem, a site needs to use both view-timeline and view-timeline-inset. A HTTP Archive search [1] which looks for sites using both shows only 12 hits:

1    https://store.marketwatch.com/

2    https://www.inbank.it/

3    https://store.thetimes.ie/

4    https://www.heraldsun.com.au/

5    https://www.gameort.com/

6    https://globalstore.thetimes.co.uk/

7    https://assinaturaglobo.globo.com/

8    https://mobile.thestar.com/

9    https://readerschoice.thestar.com/

10    https://sourcingjournal.com/

11    https://ontario-doctors.thestar.com/

12    http://fashion.telegraph.co.uk/

However, I can’t find any sign that these sites use view-timeline-[inset] from checking manually.

If problems do appear, it can be fixed easily by e.g. using view-timeline-name/view-timeline-axis instead of view-timeline, or re-ordering the declarations such that view-timeline-inset comes after.

Blink component

Blink>Animation

TAG review

None

TAG review status

Not applicable

Risks

Interoperability and Compatibility

None

Gecko: No signal

WebKit: No signal

Web developers: No signals

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?

None

Debuggability

None

Will this feature be supported on all six Blink platforms (Windows, Mac, Linux, Chrome OS, Android, and Android WebView)?

Yes

Is this feature fully tested by web-platform-tests?

Yes (added in CL).

Flag name on chrome://flags

None

Finch feature name

None

Non-finch justification

None

Requires code in //chrome?

False

Estimated milestones

Shipping on desktop

118

Shipping on Android

118

Shipping on WebView

118

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).

None

Link to entry on the Chrome Platform Status

https://chromestatus.com/feature/5201576423063552

This intent message was generated by Chrome Platform Status.

[1] 

#standardSQL

SELECT pages.url

FROM `httparchive.pages.2023_08_01_desktop` AS pages

WHERE (JSON_EXTRACT(pages.payload, "$._blinkFeatureFirstUsed.Features['728']") IS NOT NULL

    AND JSON_EXTRACT(pages.payload, "$._blinkFeatureFirstUsed.Features['730']") IS NOT NULL);

[Yoav Weiss]

Are we the first to implement this spec change?

I think this doesn't warrant a full-fledged standards position, but can we extract signals from the CSSWG minutes?

Web developers: No signals

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?

None

Debuggability

None

Will this feature be supported on all six Blink platforms (Windows, Mac, Linux, Chrome OS, Android, and Android WebView)?

Yes

Is this feature fully tested by web-platform-tests?

Yes (added in CL).

Can you add a flag in case we're wrong about the compat risk here?

--
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 on the web visit https://groups.google.com/a/chromium.org/d/msgid/blink-dev/CAKFBnUpkoy4OgADAMhhGXmMsK7fLRxQLOPDK%2Bz6OJpHa5904vQ%40mail.gmail.com.

[Anders Hartvoll Ruud]

Yes. Only Chrome has shipped view-timeline at all so far.

 

I think this doesn't warrant a full-fledged standards position, but can we extract signals from the CSSWG minutes?

It was resolved without much discussion. https://log.csswg.org/irc.w3.org/css/2023-07-21/#e1557343

Can't really extract affirmative signals from the notes, although for this it's probably enough to note the lack of objection from people with opportunity to object. Fantasai (WebKit) presented the issue. I see e.g. Emilio (Mozilla) was active on the call as well.

 

Web developers: No signals

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?

None

Debuggability

None

Will this feature be supported on all six Blink platforms (Windows, Mac, Linux, Chrome OS, Android, and Android WebView)?

Yes

Is this feature fully tested by web-platform-tests?

Yes (added in CL).

Can you add a flag in case we're wrong about the compat risk here?

Yeah, will do.

[Yoav Weiss]

LGTM1

[Chris Harrelson]

LGMT2

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/a/chromium.org/d/msgid/blink-dev/CAL5BFfX5KUdkm1ED7zPoxaxp2X1RM%3D0pcnhQsS9VY-h0bHrmXQ%40mail.gmail.com.

[Mike Taylor]

LGTM3

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/a/chromium.org/d/msgid/blink-dev/CAOMQ%2Bw-yF%2BuNRav2s%2BhJBms1s-CTQwYOEsa4f%3DZ0xvRt7Tuy%3DA%40mail.gmail.com.