Technically, yes. Deprecation warnings should only land when we're
_actually_ going to deprecate a thing, and have a reasonable schedule to
point to.

Here, though, I think we have agreement that the deprecation itself is
reasonable, and agreement on a schedule. We're only blocking on
documentation of alternatives and developer awareness, both of which
deprecation warnings support. So, I'd LGTM CLs that added warnings if you
wanted to send them my way.

-mike


On Thu, Sep 16, 2021 at 9:17 PM Rouslan Solomakhin <[email protected]>
wrote:

> HI Mike,
>
> We've been working on updating our docs and reaching out to external
> documentation owners as well. We will respond back to this email thread
> once we have significant progress to report :-D
>
> By the way, do we need to get blink-dev@ approval for starting to print
> deprecation warnings in the Developer Console? I'm not sure whether
> Developer Console warnings are considered web-facing.
>
> Cheers,
> Rouslan
>
> On Thu, Sep 16, 2021 at 3:11 PM Mike West <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>> Hey folks,
>>
>> We talked about this in the API owners meeting tonight, and I think folks
>> are conceptually on board with this deprecation along the timeline we
>> talked about above (4 milestones). That said, there's still practical
>> concern that the messaging for developers currently doesn't match the
>> requirements y'all are creating by removing `basic-card`, and we'd be much
>> more comfortable moving forward if we had concrete docs to point developers
>> to in any deprecation warning so they they have a clear migration path.
>>
>> If you can land some documentation changes, I think you'll quickly get
>> LGTMs for deprecation/removal.
>>
>> -mike
>>
>>
>> On Thu, Sep 16, 2021 at 8:03 PM Daniel Bratell <[email protected]>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> Good, because if not, I think it will leave the standard in a strange
>>> mess where a majority of the documentation will use constructs that no
>>> longer exists and that will make everyone unhappy.
>>>
>>> /Daniel
>>> On 2021-09-09 22:22, Rouslan Solomakhin wrote:
>>>
>>> Yes, we absolutely can fixup the docs that we own and reach out to the
>>> owners of the docs that we don't own ourselves.
>>>
>>> On Thu, Sep 9, 2021 at 4:21 PM Yoav Weiss <[email protected]>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Would you also be able to fix up the documentation out there that's
>>>> pointing at basic-card?
>>>> A few places I see at a glance are MDN
>>>> <https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Web/API/Payment_Request_API>,
>>>> WebFundementals
>>>> <https://developers.google.com/web/fundamentals/payments/merchant-guide/deep-dive-into-payment-request>,
>>>> Whatwebcando <https://whatwebcando.today/payments.html> , ayden.com
>>>> <https://www.adyen.com/blog/online-payments-using-the-new-web-payment-apis>
>>>>  and samsung
>>>> <https://developer.samsung.com/internet/android/web-payments-integration-guide.html>.
>>>> It seems like with a few PRs and a bit of outreach, we can make sure that
>>>> the API's canonical documentation points people in the right direction.
>>>>
>>>> On Thu, Sep 9, 2021 at 9:28 PM Rouslan Solomakhin <[email protected]>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Sure, let's do 4 milestones. We can put the deprecation message in the
>>>>> developer console in M96 and perform the removal in M100.
>>>>>
>>>>> On Thu, Sep 9, 2021 at 3:26 PM Mike West <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> Ok. Does ~4-5 milestones (M100-101 sound good to you?)
>>>>>>
>>>>>> -mike
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On Thu, Sep 9, 2021 at 9:20 PM Rouslan Solomakhin <
>>>>>> [email protected]> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> > a deprecation period before removal isn't an unreasonable path
>>>>>>> forward. WDYT
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> That sounds reasonable to us. We are planning a blog post, too, by
>>>>>>> the way.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> (Responding on behalf of Stephen and Max because they happen to be
>>>>>>> both OOO today.)
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On Thu, Sep 9, 2021 at 2:57 PM Mike West <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Given the UKM-driven manual analysis, I'm willing to believe that
>>>>>>>> sites using this mechanism won't crumble if it's removed. That said, 
>>>>>>>> the
>>>>>>>> deprecation in the spec that you pointed to above landed ~2 weeks ago.
>>>>>>>> Perhaps it's reasonable to extend developers' ability to conduct
>>>>>>>> transactions through this mechanism for a release or three before 
>>>>>>>> removing
>>>>>>>> it, warning in the console about the deprecation, blog posting, etc.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Perhaps I'm being unreasonably cautious here (and I'm totally
>>>>>>>> willing to hear reasons that might be the case!), but it seems to me 
>>>>>>>> that a
>>>>>>>> deprecation period before removal isn't an unreasonable path forward. 
>>>>>>>> WDYT?
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> -mike
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On Thu, Sep 9, 2021 at 5:46 PM Daniel Bratell <[email protected]>
>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> When I looked around to see what other methods were available, it
>>>>>>>>> seemed to me like all documentation and explainers included 
>>>>>>>>> basic-card as
>>>>>>>>> the standard method, and few of them used anything else. I wonder if 
>>>>>>>>> that
>>>>>>>>> means that it's too early to deprecate before documentation and specs 
>>>>>>>>> is
>>>>>>>>> updated to suggest alternatives.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> /Daniel
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> On 2021-09-09 14:14, Stephen Mcgruer wrote:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> > Can you clarify what breakage may look like for sites that may
>>>>>>>>> rely on it?
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> If a site was *entirely* relying on basic-card to collect credit
>>>>>>>>> card details from their user, it would be impossible for the user to
>>>>>>>>> complete their checkout. So arguably 'site completely broken' from 
>>>>>>>>> that
>>>>>>>>> perspective (assuming buying a thing is the main user journey).
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> However, such a site would also be broken on Firefox and Safari
>>>>>>>>> today (unless serving user-agent specific code), and sites also tend 
>>>>>>>>> to not
>>>>>>>>> rely on just one approach to get paid. Sites will almost definitely 
>>>>>>>>> have a
>>>>>>>>> fallback mechanism, and it will likely be invisible to the user. For
>>>>>>>>> example:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> 1. Site checks `if (window.PaymentRequest)` - passes in Chrome and
>>>>>>>>> Safari, fails in Firefox.
>>>>>>>>> 2. Site calls `new
>>>>>>>>> PaymentRequest([basic-card-data]).canMakePayment()` (or `show()` 
>>>>>>>>> directly)
>>>>>>>>> - passes in Chrome today, fails/throws in Safari.
>>>>>>>>> 3. If either of #1 or #2 failed, render a fallback payment
>>>>>>>>> information collection flow such as a HTML form.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> TL;DR - we expect very few to no sites to break due to this
>>>>>>>>> removal, unless they're doing user-agent specific branching with no
>>>>>>>>> fallback mechanisms for 'what if basic-card fails'.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> On Thu, 9 Sept 2021 at 08:03, Yoav Weiss <[email protected]>
>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Can you clarify what breakage may look like for sites that may
>>>>>>>>>> rely on it?
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> On Tuesday, September 7, 2021 at 2:34:46 PM UTC+2 Stephen McGruer
>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> > Any usecounter stats you can share?
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Unfortunately no usecounters for two reasons:
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> 1) Payment APIs in general have very low usage when compared to
>>>>>>>>>>> 'page loads', because the most popular sites on the web aren't 
>>>>>>>>>>> merchants
>>>>>>>>>>> and so don't use them. For example, PaymentRequest.show is at
>>>>>>>>>>> 0.001
>>>>>>>>>>> <https://chromestatus.com/metrics/feature/timeline/popularity/2895>.
>>>>>>>>>>> They're still very important, so we have to measure usage other 
>>>>>>>>>>> ways :)
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> 2) In particular for basic-card, it's actually just a
>>>>>>>>>>> method-type of PaymentRequest, so our top-level usecounters don't 
>>>>>>>>>>> show it.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> We have internal stats that I can't share publicly due to
>>>>>>>>>>> sensitivity (Googlers, feel free to ping me for a link), but I can 
>>>>>>>>>>> share
>>>>>>>>>>> that of transactions using PaymentRequest, basic-card is ~2% of all
>>>>>>>>>>> transactions and <1% of completed transactions. So it's a very niche
>>>>>>>>>>> feature that also performs poorly.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Max has also done an analysis of the top 10 sites from UKM data
>>>>>>>>>>> that use basic-card. For 4, he couldn't get to the payments page or
>>>>>>>>>>> couldn't get it to trigger basic-card at all (possibly 
>>>>>>>>>>> geographically
>>>>>>>>>>> gated), but for the remaining 6 he confirmed that all 6 function 
>>>>>>>>>>> properly
>>>>>>>>>>> in a version of Chrome that has basic-card disabled (falling back 
>>>>>>>>>>> to the
>>>>>>>>>>> same behavior they use for Firefox + Safari).
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> On Mon, 6 Sept 2021 at 03:26, Yoav Weiss <[email protected]>
>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> On Fri, Sep 3, 2021 at 4:25 PM Liquan (Max) Gu <
>>>>>>>>>>>> [email protected]> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Contact emails [email protected], [email protected]
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Specification https://www.w3.org/TR/payment-method-basic-card/
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Summary
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Deprecate the "basic-card" payment method from PaymentRequest
>>>>>>>>>>>>> API.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Blink component Blink>Payments
>>>>>>>>>>>>> <https://bugs.chromium.org/p/chromium/issues/list?q=component:Blink%3EPayments>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Motivation
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> * Its usage is low and declining, underperforms other payment
>>>>>>>>>>>>> methods in time-to-checkout and completion rate and does not have
>>>>>>>>>>>>> improvement potential.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> Any usecounter stats you can share?
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> * W3C's interest in it has waned. 6 participants supported the
>>>>>>>>>>>>> deprecation and no objection[1], and W3C has deprecated the 
>>>>>>>>>>>>> spec[2]. [1]
>>>>>>>>>>>>> https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-payments-wg/2021Aug/0038.html
>>>>>>>>>>>>> [2]
>>>>>>>>>>>>> https://github.com/w3c/payment-method-basic-card/pull/90/files
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Interoperability and Compatibility
>>>>>>>>>>>>> * Chrome is the only implementer of basic-card, so the
>>>>>>>>>>>>> basic-card removal from Chrome will increase interoperability.
>>>>>>>>>>>>> * Since no other browser implements basic-card, web developers
>>>>>>>>>>>>> already need workarounds to support other browsers.
>>>>>>>>>>>>> * Whether basic-card is supported can be detected via
>>>>>>>>>>>>> canMakePayment
>>>>>>>>>>>>> <https://w3c.github.io/payment-request/#canmakepayment-method>.
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Web developers normally use this to decide whether to fallback to
>>>>>>>>>>>>> other methods.
>>>>>>>>>>>>> * We have checked the few top sites via UKM - they all appear
>>>>>>>>>>>>> to work with basic-card disabled because they fallback to other 
>>>>>>>>>>>>> methods to
>>>>>>>>>>>>> get payment info.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Tracking bug https://crbug.com/1209835
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Estimated milestones M96
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Link to entry on the Chrome Platform Status
>>>>>>>>>>>>> https://chromestatus.com/feature/5730051011117056
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> This intent message was generated by Chrome Platform Status
>>>>>>>>>>>>> <https://www.chromestatus.com/>.
>>>>>>>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>>>>>>>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Google Groups "blink-dev" group.
>>>>>>>>>>>>> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from
>>>>>>>>>>>>> it, send an email to [email protected].
>>>>>>>>>>>>> To view this discussion on the web visit
>>>>>>>>>>>>> https://groups.google.com/a/chromium.org/d/msgid/blink-dev/CAEWPi2sswphwqEnCGgwwNOr_F5j8V%3Dc5ZQ7Kz6h2gK%2Bki2A6aw%40mail.gmail.com
>>>>>>>>>>>>> <https://groups.google.com/a/chromium.org/d/msgid/blink-dev/CAEWPi2sswphwqEnCGgwwNOr_F5j8V%3Dc5ZQ7Kz6h2gK%2Bki2A6aw%40mail.gmail.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> .
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the
>>>>>>>>>>>> Google Groups "payments-dev" group.
>>>>>>>>>>>> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from
>>>>>>>>>>>> it, send an email to [email protected].
>>>>>>>>>>>> To view this discussion on the web visit
>>>>>>>>>>>> https://groups.google.com/a/chromium.org/d/msgid/payments-dev/CAL5BFfUaHsXJEEwN3JO2MSGw9WHsVt5nszPPscKh9mBrRt5U1g%40mail.gmail.com
>>>>>>>>>>>> <https://groups.google.com/a/chromium.org/d/msgid/payments-dev/CAL5BFfUaHsXJEEwN3JO2MSGw9WHsVt5nszPPscKh9mBrRt5U1g%40mail.gmail.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer>
>>>>>>>>>>>> .
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>>>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
>>>>>>>>> Groups "blink-dev" group.
>>>>>>>>> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it,
>>>>>>>>> send an email to [email protected].
>>>>>>>>> To view this discussion on the web visit
>>>>>>>>> https://groups.google.com/a/chromium.org/d/msgid/blink-dev/CADY3MafMcTV1GOHS62bHd%2BK%2BH1ftH0pBZL_1k77GWJqK8o9Uvg%40mail.gmail.com
>>>>>>>>> <https://groups.google.com/a/chromium.org/d/msgid/blink-dev/CADY3MafMcTV1GOHS62bHd%2BK%2BH1ftH0pBZL_1k77GWJqK8o9Uvg%40mail.gmail.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer>
>>>>>>>>> .
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>>>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
>>>>>>>>> Groups "blink-dev" group.
>>>>>>>>> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it,
>>>>>>>>> send an email to [email protected].
>>>>>>>>> To view this discussion on the web visit
>>>>>>>>> https://groups.google.com/a/chromium.org/d/msgid/blink-dev/25df3c17-3cf3-695a-451f-ef1007581d53%40gmail.com
>>>>>>>>> <https://groups.google.com/a/chromium.org/d/msgid/blink-dev/25df3c17-3cf3-695a-451f-ef1007581d53%40gmail.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer>
>>>>>>>>> .
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
>>>>>>>> Groups "payments-dev" group.
>>>>>>>> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it,
>>>>>>>> send an email to [email protected].
>>>>>>>> To view this discussion on the web visit
>>>>>>>> https://groups.google.com/a/chromium.org/d/msgid/payments-dev/CAKXHy%3De-AdXxo8CtZrSk-iPN05KmJ0_FWHOw5duyBXFGR58oGA%40mail.gmail.com
>>>>>>>> <https://groups.google.com/a/chromium.org/d/msgid/payments-dev/CAKXHy%3De-AdXxo8CtZrSk-iPN05KmJ0_FWHOw5duyBXFGR58oGA%40mail.gmail.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer>
>>>>>>>> .
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"blink-dev" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to [email protected].
To view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/a/chromium.org/d/msgid/blink-dev/CAKXHy%3DeRtBt-6pSLPL%2BuqJ5v-U63EPH9U3i3n4O2_bj3XnV15A%40mail.gmail.com.

Reply via email to