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

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

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

> Will ship enabled for all users > > *Requires code in //chrome?* > > False > > *Tracking bug* > > https://issues.chromium.org/issues/346835896 >

Does this intent deprecate or change behavior of existing APIs, such that it has potentially high risk for Android WebView-based applications? No. This is a new feature. Debuggability

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

time we ship `window-drag`. >>> The ChromeStatus cites non-trivial usage for both existing names: >>> `-webkit-app-region` at 0.79% of page loads and `app-

>> Intent-to-Ship, and are agreeing to treat it as such. With that >> caveat, and with the Finch rollout plan in play, LGTM1. > LGTM2 - thanks for the careful rollout

we should ship to match WebKit here. But also +1 to the question of whether Mozilla has an opinion on the API shape and have any interest in going beyond what WebKit has already done, such

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? >>> Low. The

see this ship (after apparently dropping the ball on it >>>>>>> myself >>>>>>> >>>>>>> over a decade ago)

with this intent (especially after reflecting >> >> on my handling of the prompt API intent) is whether it meets our bar for >> establishing "plausible interoperability

our original Intent to Ship thread didn't adequately capture >> the momentum we see from the ecosystem for a generalized Prompt API. >> >> What began as early

Re: Intent to Ship: > Support hreflang and type for HTMLAreaElement > > > > > You don't often get email from mt...@igalia.com. Learn why > this is important

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

or an Intent to Ship. You > are right that this is a new feature in Chromium, so I will re-submit > it as an Intent to Ship. > > Best, > Felipe > > On Thursday, 11 June

Re: Intent to Ship: Speculation rules: form_submission field LGTM2 On 6/15/26 2:40 pm, Alex Russell wrote: LGTM1 On Thursday, June 11, 2026 at 6:35:21 PM UTC-7 Huanpo Lin wrote: Yes

necessitates this Intent to Ship. >> >> The initial Intent to Ship >> for >> this feature already included a link to the specification's Pull Request

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

Hello. I have updated the ruby-overhang-spaces-vertical-003.html test. As you can see on wpt.fyi , all ruby-overhang tests are now passing. I

LGTM3 /Danie On 2026-06-10 17:12, Alex Russell wrote: > LGTM2 > > On Wednesday, June 10, 2026 at 3:47:16 PM UTC+2 Yoav Weiss wrote: > >

WebCodecs and ship it > on Window too. > See the I2S: > https://groups.google.com/a/chromium.org/g/blink-dev/c/oo6MQoRbDXk/m/7Kjjfe9NAwAJ > > > >>

:* Intent to Ship: Support 'path-length' as a CSS property. > > > > *Contact emails* > > viralipurbey@microsoft.com > > > > *Specification

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

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

before we ship: > > * https://github.com/whatwg/html/issues/11478#issuecomment-4622847878 > > o Introduces a new NodeRange interface between AbstractRange >

intended to ship? Will deviate from what's described in >>> the standards position requests, and if so how? >> >> That's a good catch. The explainer

WebKit is currently implementing `alpha()`, and they have raised a new issue[1] with the CSSWG. I think we should wait for the CSSWG's decision

of an intent to ship because this only changes invalid cases or edge cases, and the usage of customizable select is still quite low (0.02%). *Blink component* Blink>Forms>Select