but instead ship a Chrome Apps API to >>>> the web. I don't know if that's an appropriate thing for us to approve >>>> through the Blink process. Even

time to ship, LGTM1 >>>>>> >>>>>> On Wednesday, March 12, 2025 at 8:12:47 AM UTC-7 Mike Taylor wrote: >>>>>> >>

this to ship in Chromium. >>>>> >>>>> *> Is this feature fully tested by web-platform-tests?* >>>>> > Yes >>>

> >>>>>>>>>> Does this intent deprecate or change behavior of existing APIs, >>>>>>>>>> such that it has

Does this intent deprecate or change behavior of existing APIs, such >>>> that it has potentially high risk for Android WebView-based applications? >>>>

dev] Intent to Ship: Add >>>>>>>>> MediaStreamTrack support to the Web Speech API >>>>>>>>> >>>>>

Does this intent deprecate or change behavior of existing APIs, such that it has potentially high risk for Android WebView-based applications? Non that I am aware of Debuggability

Apple does ship a similar feature, we believe that we need >> the experience that comes with shipping before attempting standardization >> or alignment of architectures

when we ship this? >>>> >>> >>> Yep >>> >>> ! >>> >>> >>>> Finch feature nameNone >>

Does this intent deprecate or change behavior of existing APIs, such that > it has potentially high risk for Android WebView-based applications? > > No > > > Debuggability

, this Intent to Ship (I2S) will be paused while we address this dependency. We will provide updates on the I2S once we have made progress on supporting the defer attribute or if we encounter

ahead and ship this? > Yes - approved! > > Thank you, > Sejal > > > ------------------------------ > *From:* blink-dev@chromium.org on behalf of > Daniel

Re: Intent to Ship: Support width and height as >>> presentation attributes on nested elements >>> >>> >>> >>> This intent feels

ready to ship to me, but this amount of discussion muddles the >> situation a bit. >> >> On Saturday, February 15, 2025 at 9:59:59 AM UTC+9 Fernando Fiori wrote: >

'll ship both of them together. > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > *From:* Philip Jägenstedt > *Sent:

On Wed, Jul 2, 2025 at 8:40 AM Yoav Weiss (@Shopify) wrote: > LGTM2 conditional on two things: > 1) Removing the "at risk" label from

Hi, After coordinating with my colleague Roger Zanoni, I will continue the development and shipping of this feature. In the previous discussion, two

Does this intent deprecate or change behavior of existing APIs, such >>>>> that it has potentially high risk for Android WebView-based applications? >>>

Does this intent deprecate or change behavior of existing APIs, >>>>>>>> such that it has potentially high risk for Android WebView-based >>>

Does this intent deprecate or change behavior of existing APIs, such that > it has potentially high risk for Android WebView-based applications?* > > None > > >

sense to ship matching > the initial value that Safari already shipped. At that point we expect > https://github.com/w3c/csswg-drafts/issues/12386 to be resolved to match

Does this intent deprecate or change behavior of existing APIs, such >>>> that it has potentially high risk for Android WebView-based applications? >>>>

Does this intent deprecate or change behavior of existing APIs, such that >> it has potentially high risk for Android WebView-based applications? >> >> None >

happy to ship WebAuthn with > a similar tracking risk'. I am sure that the community consists of people > who are both more and less ok with that risk, and also acknowledge that

the required Intent options. I'll take a look at that and the other issues. >>> >>> Peter, apps that use webview will need to implement >>> WebChromeClient

dev] Intent to Experiment: Local >> Network Access >> >> >> >> LGTM to experiment via Finch in pre-stable channels. >> >> >> >

like this intent to cover both, but I'm not planning to ship >>>>> the `__HostHttp` variant until the dust settles on the desired spelling. >>>>

>> intent to be more eager than the "conservative" setting. More detail on >>> this and other upcoming improvements to speculation rules eagerness are

Does this intent deprecate or change behavior of existing > APIs, such that it has potentially high risk for Android > WebView-based applications? > > None > > >

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