why the Experiment Goals became empty, but let me copy > contents from chromestatus. > > 2025年7月18日(金) 12:25 Chromestatus : > > > Contact emails > > yyanagisawa

>> experiment on? (Right now it just shows DevTrial on 139) >> >> On 7/16/25 11:31 am, Chromestatus wrote: >>> >>> >>> Contact emails

pivot this intent to a > gapless I2S"? (sorry but I am a bit confused) > I am requesting the extension to cover up to and including Chrome 140, and > we are optimistic that

Re: Intent to Experiment: Clipboardchange event LGTM1; are there engaged partners that you're expecting to get feedback from? And is there any chance you'll come back with

for the experiment: > > - *Cross-platform timeline*: Having a roadmap for macOS/Linux/Android > would help us plan our development strategy beyond the Windows-only OT

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

the user's intent. Having > an in-content element that the user uses to trigger the permission > flow allows for improved permission prompt UX for users as well as a > recovery

start the experiment. Please let me know if there are any > such concerns or action items currently known. > > (I added a comment to the requests-for-position about the per

LGTM to experiment 139-142 inclusive On Monday, June 30, 2025 at 12:34:52 PM UTC+2 Chromestatus wrote: > Contact emails domenic@chromium.org, yyanagisawa@chromium.org >

stable channel experiment, correct? >> >> >> >> *From:* Rick Byers >> *Sent:* Tuesday, June 24, 2025 1:40 PM >> *To:* Hubert Chao >>

dev] Intent to Experiment: Web Authentication immediate mediation LGTM On Wed, Jun 25, 2025 at 5:45 AM Ken Buchanan > wrote: Contact emails kenrb@chromium.org , derinel@google

for the experiment, but I think it'd be good to: * Expand on the use case you're trying to resolve. Do you want to reduce the amount of paints that are happening during the page

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

run an experiment in 139 /Daniel On 2025-06-18 17:18, Ari Chivukula wrote: > > Contact emails > > arichiv@chromium.org , > awillia@chromium.org , aaj@google.com

LGTM to experiment. I had lots of questions on the details but they were all very well covered by the explainer. Thank you, I'm excited to see this progress towards shipping! Thank

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

LGTM to experiment from M139 to M144 inclusive. On 5/16/25 3:18 AM, Domenic Denicola wrote: > > > Contact emails > > ayui@chromium.org, msw@chromium.org, btriebw

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 > > > Goals

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

when the experiment ends. > > Storage access headers make it difficult for a publisher to ascertain if > some generic third party would receive none or active on their request

run the experiment). AIUI, the design doc mentions sites attesting to > benefit from this feature, so there will be a new API involved at some > point. > > I'm happy to

during the experiment period. > > > > /Gecko/: Defer > (https://github.com/mozilla/standards-positions/issues/1067) > > /WebKit/: No signal > (https

during the experiment period. > > > > /Gecko/: Defer > (https://github.com/mozilla/standards-positions/issues/1067) > > /WebKit/: No signal > (https

LGTM to experiment from M137-M142. > > On Wed, Apr 23, 2025 at 11:13 AM 'Gabriel Brito' via blink-dev < > blin...@chromium.org> wrote: > >> Ok. Added

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

the original intent. Great > to see things evolve while in OT. > > Has there been feedback on this so far? Anything y'all can share? > > Best, > > Alex > >

more developers experiment with this API. >> >> >> WebView application risks >> >> Does this intent deprecate or change behavior of existing APIs

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? > > > > Goals for experimentation