Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Agenda discussion for public meeting on 2023-03-16 #360

Closed
dotproto opened this issue Mar 4, 2023 · 10 comments
Closed

Agenda discussion for public meeting on 2023-03-16 #360

dotproto opened this issue Mar 4, 2023 · 10 comments
Labels
agenda Discuss in future meetings

Comments

@dotproto
Copy link
Member

dotproto commented Mar 4, 2023

Please comment on this issue to add topics for our 2023-03-16. The agenda will be finalized two days before the actual meeting and migrated to our meeting notes doc.

Topics

  • [@dotproto] Check in on interface definition comparison progress
  • [@hanguokai] Issue #111: Allow overriding newtab/bookmarks/history as an optional behavior
  • [@javifernandez] Issue #317: registerProtocolHandler (protocol_handlers) in extensions
    • It seems there was an agreement on following the declarative approach implemented by Firefox, but we were waiting for some clearer position from Chrome.
  • [@lukewarlow] Issue #361: Proposal: Add an API to integrate with the Credential Management Web API
@dotproto dotproto added agenda Discuss in future meetings and removed needs-triage labels Mar 4, 2023
@hanguokai
Copy link
Member

#111
Browsers should allow override newtab/bookmarks/history as an optional behavior instead of forceable binary behavior.

@dotproto
Copy link
Member Author

dotproto commented Mar 7, 2023

@hanguokai, added it to the list, but I think this is technically outside the scope of this group's remit.

The features and UX around those features are product decisions made by a given browser vendor. For the purposes of specifying a common platform we can discuss APIs, developer expectations, development patterns, etc., but I don't expect that any browser vendor will want to specify aspects of their program policies or store requirements.

@hanguokai
Copy link
Member

@dotproto It's about product experience (improving user experience), but I don't think it's against the policy. I'll explain more details later in #111

@javifernandez
Copy link

javifernandez commented Mar 9, 2023

Would it make sense to discuss again about #317 ? It seems there was an agreement on following the declarative approach implemented by Firefox, but we were waiting for some clearer position from Chrome.

@hanguokai
Copy link
Member

It seems that there was no substantive progress on #317 at the last meeting(2022-12-08). In order to make progress in next meeting, @oliverdunk should ask Chrome's position internally before next meeting. Thanks you.

@oliverdunk
Copy link
Member

Thanks for the callout @hanguokai. I'll try to look in to this.

@lukewarlow
Copy link
Member

#361

APl to integrate extensions with the Credential Management API

@dotproto
Copy link
Member Author

Updated the list to reflect comments up to this point.

@dotproto
Copy link
Member Author

Closing as the meeting will start shortly.

@hanguokai
Copy link
Member

I am not very good at listening and speaking English, so it is difficult for me to discuss with you in a video conference. But welcome to communicate with me in text form on the issues.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
agenda Discuss in future meetings
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

5 participants