we need to go first is much higher than when >>> closing compatibility gaps. >>> >>> This explainer doesn't indicate why anyone needs the feature

stay tuned to bug reports as well as metrics while Finching this. > > On Monday, September 8, 2025 at 11:15:38 AM UTC+2 Steinar H Gunderson > wrote: > >> On Thu, Sep

IdPs) to return structured JSON objects instead > of plain strings to Relying Parties (RPs) via the id_assertion_endpoint. > This change simplifies integration for developers

enables authors to > specify that the target of an SVG hyperlink should be > downloaded rather than navigated to, mirroring the behavior > already supported in HTMLAnchorElement

"Prepare to ship" reviews (Privacy, WP Security, etc) in the ChromeStatus entry? -- Dan On Wednesday, September 3, 2025 at 9:11:36 AM UTC-7 sakh...@chromium.org wrote

getting sorted to Dan and >> Domenic's satisfaction. >> >> Best, >> >> Alex >> >> On Wednesday, September 3, 2025 at 10:29:22 AM

this as to their specific use case. My goal is to improve our understanding of the motivation because right now it's unclear how to balance the benefits vs the risks of the feature

be useful to update that existing doc > for `CSS if()` to include this range syntax and the developer motivation > for it, along with the other suggestions from the TAG. The TAG

right place to ask but I'm curious what the status of this is? I'm on WebView 141 and it is still sending the X-Requested-With header. On Wednesday, April 19, 2023 at 2:55:38

the listbox to mobile and adds a multi-select > popup to desktop, and makes the opt-ins with the size and multiple > attributes result in the same rendering mode across mobile

for webdevs to enable? > > Daniel Bratell schrieb am Mittwoch, 3. September 2025 um 17:17:28 UTC+2: > >> Great! >> >> Can you please add the flag to appropriate

> *To Vlad's questions:* >> >> > - I assume direct navigation to a local network is fine and remains >> without permission? (like navigating to your router's

> LGTM1 to ship async. > > On Fri, Aug 29, 2025 at 7:06 AM 'Virali Purbey' via blink-dev < > blink-dev@chromium.org> wrote: > >> Hi Daniel, >

be good to decide on a path forward. Based on the use counter call sites , these are the properties in question: - Intl.Locale.prototype.calendars - Intl.Locale.prototype.collations

LGTM3

the explainer to be light on details. I'm fine with it just pointing to example sections in the spec, but I think it'd be good to beef up these sections and explain what parts are

be renamed to `.tentative` until those discussions >>> settle? >>> >>> On Thu, Aug 21, 2025 at 7:42 PM Guido Urdaneta >>> wrote: >>>

The extension to a property bag carries some compat risk, but >> presumably that is reduced with the property bag casting to `true`, and all >> of its values being some version

so responsive to all the concerns raised to date. > > On Wednesday, August 20, 2025 at 11:37:40 AM UTC-7 janewman via > Chromestatus wrote: > >> The [spec PR](https

the explainer to move a code >>>> example to the beginning of the proposal and have also added examples for >>>> the considered alternatives. >>>

` option to >>> navigateEvent.intercept(), similar to `handler`, would defer the >>> commit until that handler (and all other precommit handlers) are >>

is willing to ship breaking changes to the feature based on future feedback, that's an acceptable risk. On Wednesday, August 20, 2025 at 5:02:20 AM UTC+2 Rick Byers wrote: >

restricting access to the Device >> Attributes API, which is available only for policy-installed kiosk web apps >> and policy-installed Isolated Web Apps, both only

a mechanism to verify the >>> provenance of resources they depend upon, creating a technical foundation >>> for trust in a site's dependencies. In short:

small changes to the revealing algorithms for >> hidden=until-found and details elements in order to prevent the browser >> from getting stuck in an infinite loop: >

assigned myself to the tracking bug at: > > https://issues.chromium.org/issues/40811938 > > Kind regards, > Felipe > > On Tuesday, 11 April 2023 at 12:09:

thanks specifically to Mike for pointing that out, I have updated the chromestatus entry to indicate that the TAG is satisfied Christian On Wed, Aug 6, 2025 at 3:47 PM Mike Taylor wrote

+1 to Yoav's comment. On Wednesday, August 6, 2025 at 8:25:49 AM UTC-7 yoav...@chromium.org wrote: > LGTM2 > > I'm not 100% convinced that the "boost"

> volunteered to be an editor of the W3C IndexedDB spec. >> >> The W3C Tag Review also completed >> after I >> sent this intent to ship. >> >>

this has to be "No" because getDisplayMedia is >>> not supported on all platforms, but can you confirm it will ship everywhere >>> that getDisplayMedia