On Fri, Jun 30, 2023 at 5:03 PM Mike Taylor <[email protected]> wrote:
> On 7/1/23 3:09 AM, Paul Jensen wrote: > > > On Wed, Jun 28, 2023 at 5:33 AM Yoav Weiss <[email protected]> wrote: > >> >> >> On Tue, Jun 27, 2023 at 9:54 PM Paul Jensen <[email protected]> >> wrote: >> >>> Yoav, >>> >>> Protected Audiences has been fortunate to have a ton of design >>> contributions and feedback, but consequently has a lot of issues filed. We >>> try to respond to all issues, as you can see by the discussion comments on >>> nearly all issues. I went through and triaged all the issues recently. I >>> closed many of them, created some labels and labeled many of them. Here’s >>> where I think the open issues stand: >>> >>> - >>> >>> 65 >>> >>> <https://github.com/WICG/turtledove/labels/Non-breaking%20Feature%20Request> >>> I labeled “Non-breaking Feature Request”, meaning they’re requesting new >>> functionality that is unlikely to cause backwards compatibility issues. >>> - >>> >>> 29 <https://github.com/WICG/turtledove/labels/spec> are spec >>> related. As Dominic said above, most of these changes are unlikely to >>> break web content. >>> - >>> >>> 8 >>> <https://github.com/WICG/turtledove/labels/Looking%20for%20feedback> >>> are seeking feedback rather than pointing to a problem. >>> - >>> >>> 4 <https://github.com/WICG/turtledove/labels/compat%20concern> could >>> potentially break compatibility. I think for all of these we’ve decided >>> to >>> not adopt the proposed changes or we’ve decided to adopt the proposed >>> changes but as part of our longer-term plans in the future. I should >>> note >>> that recently we adopted many breaking changes to our API, but did so in >>> a >>> way that supports backwards compatibility, so we can wean developers off >>> of >>> the old APIs without causing immediate significant breakage. If we chose >>> to adopt some of these changes, I imagine we could do so in a similar >>> non-breaking way. >>> - >>> >>> 86 >>> >>> <https://github.com/WICG/turtledove/issues?q=is%3Aopen+-label%3A%22Non-breaking+Feature+Request%22++-label%3Aspec+-label%3A%22Looking+for+feedback%22+-label%3A%22compat+concern%22> >>> didn’t fit well into a particular category: >>> - >>> >>> Some were questions seeking to clarify details of our timeline or >>> the explainer or design. >>> - >>> >>> Some were discussions that are mostly addressed but left open so >>> we don’t forget about remaining pieces. >>> - >>> >>> Some are open discussions or examples. >>> >>> I think it’s worth noting that our usage of the issue system differs >>> from those of many other folks who ship features: We tend to use the >>> issues as open forums as opposed to only leaving open issues that need to >>> have decisions made. Many of the issues predate the FLEDGE explainer and >>> represent design discussions that culminated in FLEDGE’s design. >>> >> >> Thanks for going over the issues!! To be clear, the number of issues is >> not a concern in itself, and is indeed an indication of the level of >> engagement this had. >> This list of compat-related issues >> <https://github.com/WICG/turtledove/labels/compat%20concern> is the only >> relevant bit for this intent IMO. At the same time, it'd be good to settle >> these issues, or at least have a clear path towards future-compat around >> them, before shipping. WDYT? >> > > I think we’ve settled on paths to addressing each of the compat issues: > > #444 <https://github.com/WICG/turtledove/issues/444> and #586 > <https://github.com/WICG/turtledove/issues/586> I think we’ve settled on > not pursuing for reasons expressed in the issues. > > #522 <https://github.com/WICG/turtledove/issues/522> has been our long > term plan but we've heard feedback that it blocks adoption and usability at > this stage, especially in the long-tail of advertisers. Providing a > solution to audience stealing is an important goal of Protected Audience. > Our current implementation offers opt-in protection via our > Permission-Policy, and we're going to continue to look for an ergonomic > solution that facilitates adoption sufficiently to offer the protection by > default. > #554 <https://github.com/WICG/turtledove/issues/554> is something we > might do, and could do in the future while offering a temporary > backward-compatible period. It doesn’t have significant developer > benefits, other than making it potentially more web-like, so I’m reluctant > to adopt it. > > Thanks Paul. Could you close out 586 and leave comments on 522 and 554 > with your current thinking? > Done. > > Re: 554, do you have plans to update the spec to match Chromium's > implementation of setBid(), setPriority(), and setPrioritySignalsOverride()? > Yes, I think this makes sense, I noted this in #554. We will make this change soon. > Or do something else? > > >> >>> I hope the labels I added make it clearer which are future enhancements >>> and not likely to break backwards compatibility. I honestly think over the >>> years before our Origin Trial and over the course of our lengthy Origin >>> Trial we’ve addressed all the feedback for core functionality in Protected >>> Audience and don’t anticipate breaking backwards compatibility in >>> significant ways. >>> >>> On Thu, Jun 22, 2023 at 3:56 AM Yoav Weiss <[email protected]> >>> wrote: >>> >>>> Glancing at the open issues, I see 291 of them >>>> <https://github.com/WICG/turtledove/issues?page=2&q=is%3Aopen>.. Would >>>> it be possible to go over the issues and label them so that it's clearer >>>> which are about future enhancements, which are editorial and which may have >>>> an impact on the processing model or API shape in ways that can impact >>>> future compatibility? >>>> >>>> On Wed, Jun 21, 2023 at 8:00 PM Dominic Farolino <[email protected]> >>>> wrote: >>>> >>>>> As the spec mentor for this feature I'll offer a spec maturity summary >>>>> <https://www.chromium.org/blink/launching-features/#:~:text=If%20your%20specification%20isn%27t%20a%20modification%20of%20an%20existing%20specification%2C%20include%20a%20one%2Dline%20spec%20maturity%20summary%20from%20someone%20outside%20your%20team%20(like%20your%20spec%20mentor)%20who%20has%20done%20a%20review.>. >>>>> @Jeffrey Yasskin <[email protected]> and I reviewed the spec in >>>>> detail recently and were pleased with the improvements that the team >>>>> worked >>>>> with us to make recently, especially with regards to: >>>>> >>>>> - >>>>> >>>>> Formalizing the interaction with times and dates >>>>> - >>>>> >>>>> Adding rigor to the in parallel work (and its interaction with the >>>>> main thread and the Script Runner realms) >>>>> - >>>>> >>>>> Fetch integration >>>>> - >>>>> >>>>> Specifying the conversions from internal spec data to JS objects >>>>> when calling into the Script Runners >>>>> <https://wicg.github.io/turtledove/#script-runners>, mostly by >>>>> increasing the use of WebIDL >>>>> >>>>> In a few of these points there is still work to be done, and we've >>>>> been filing bugs <https://github.com/WICG/turtledove/labels/spec> >>>>> against the specification for individual tasks that the team has committed >>>>> to making progress on in the very near future. The spec overall is not >>>>> yet very readable <https://github.com/WICG/turtledove/issues/646>, >>>>> which means external reviewers will have to spend time to understand the >>>>> flow before they can give substantive feedback. From a completeness >>>>> perspective, the spec still has over a dozen "TODOs" (I expect that >>>>> they’ll >>>>> be finished soon given how many have recently closed), including the bulk >>>>> of the integration with Fenced Frames >>>>> <https://github.com/WICG/turtledove/pull/616>, whose completion might >>>>> help other browser engines notice new interoperability issues. The team is >>>>> completing these at a good pace, but this implies that in addition to >>>>> finishing pieces of the spec that document the current implementation, >>>>> there will probably be minor web-visible changes after shipping in M115. >>>>> However, most of these changes are unlikely to break web content, and if >>>>> anything bigger comes up, the Privacy Sandbox's general tools for >>>>> migrating >>>>> their users should be effective. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> On Tue, Jun 20, 2023 at 4:06 PM Paul Jensen <[email protected]> >>>>> wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> *Contact emails* >>>>>> >>>>>> [email protected], [email protected], [email protected] >>>>>> >>>>>> Explainer >>>>>> >>>>>> https://github.com/WICG/turtledove/blob/master/FLEDGE.m >>>>>> <https://github.com/WICG/turtledove/blob/master/FLEDGE.md>d >>>>>> >>>>>> Specification >>>>>> >>>>>> https://wicg.github.io/turtledove >>>>>> >>>>>> Summary >>>>>> >>>>>> The Protected Audience API (formerly known as FLEDGE) provides a >>>>>> method of interest-group advertising without having to track individual >>>>>> users’ detailed browsing history as is done today with third-party >>>>>> cookies. >>>>>> Additional advantages over cookies include time limits on group >>>>>> membership, >>>>>> better user controls, and more user transparency. >>>>>> >>>>>> Blink component >>>>>> >>>>>> Blink>InterestGroups >>>>>> <https://bugs.chromium.org/p/chromium/issues/list?q=component%3ABlink%3EInterestGroups&can=2> >>>>>> >>>>>> TAG review >>>>>> >>>>>> https://github.com/w3ctag/design-reviews/issues/723 >>>>>> >>>>>> TAG review status >>>>>> >>>>>> Pending since March 2022 >>>>>> >>>>>> Risks >>>>>> Compatibility >>>>>> >>>>>> This is not a breaking change. To use it, sites will need to call the >>>>>> Protected Audience API. There is no change to existing behavior for sites >>>>>> not calling the API. It’s worth noting that the spec uses WebIDL to >>>>>> describe the script runners >>>>>> <https://wicg.github.io/turtledove/#script-runners> but the >>>>>> implementation does not. There may be minor compat issues as we align the >>>>>> implementation with the WebIDL semantics over time. >>>>>> >>>>>> Interoperability >>>>>> >>>>>> Gecko: No signal, requested March 2023 >>>>>> <https://github.com/mozilla/standards-positions/issues/770> >>>>>> >>>>>> WebKit: No signal, requested March 2023 >>>>>> <https://github.com/WebKit/standards-positions/issues/158> >>>>>> >>>>>> Edge: Edge explored interest group based advertising, namely with the >>>>>> PARAKEET proposal >>>>>> <https://github.com/WICG/privacy-preserving-ads/blob/main/Parakeet.md>. >>>>>> PARAKEET shares much of its API with Protected Audience but as >>>>>> discussed in TPAC 2022 >>>>>> <https://docs.google.com/presentation/d/1QQgrm4oaRRRBr1gfvKj7D8rS2EW8kRgRUHPscvR8BNo/edit#slide=id.g15545e7b627_0_173>, >>>>>> involves proxying data to non-trusted servers in real-time whereas >>>>>> Protected Audience does not have long term plans to do this. >>>>>> >>>>>> Web developers: Significant interest from many web developers. >>>>>> Significant >>>>>> Origin Trial participation >>>>>> <https://github.com/WICG/turtledove/blob/main/fledge-tester-list.md>. >>>>>> WICG FLEDGE calls <https://github.com/WICG/turtledove/issues/88> >>>>>> are heavily attended. Interest in Protected Audience is further >>>>>> evidenced >>>>>> by the many related discussions and proposals that Protected >>>>>> Audience’s design draws from, most notably: >>>>>> >>>>>> - >>>>>> >>>>>> The original TURTLEDOVE >>>>>> <https://github.com/WICG/turtledove/blob/main/Original-TURTLEDOVE.md> >>>>>> from Chrome. >>>>>> - >>>>>> >>>>>> SPARROW <https://github.com/WICG/sparrow> from Criteo. >>>>>> - >>>>>> >>>>>> Outcome-based TURTLEDOVE >>>>>> <https://github.com/WICG/turtledove/blob/main/OUTCOME_BASED.md> >>>>>> and Product-level TURTLEDOVE >>>>>> <https://github.com/WICG/turtledove/blob/main/PRODUCT_LEVEL.md> >>>>>> from RTB House. >>>>>> - >>>>>> >>>>>> Dovekey >>>>>> <https://github.com/google/ads-privacy/tree/master/proposals/dovekey> >>>>>> from Google Ads. >>>>>> - >>>>>> >>>>>> PARRROT >>>>>> >>>>>> <https://github.com/prebid/identity-gatekeeper/blob/master/proposals/PARRROT.md> >>>>>> from Magnite. >>>>>> - >>>>>> >>>>>> TERN <https://github.com/WICG/turtledove/blob/main/TERN.md> from >>>>>> NextRoll. >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> Demo link >>>>>> https://developer.chrome.com/docs/privacy-sandbox/fledge-api/#demo >>>>>> Debuggability >>>>>> >>>>>> To learn more about debugging Protected Audience in Chrome please >>>>>> follow these links: >>>>>> https://developer.chrome.com/blog/fledge-api/#debugging >>>>>> https://developer.chrome.com/blog/fledge-api/#observe-fledge-events >>>>>> >>>>>> Will this feature be supported on all six Blink platforms (Windows, >>>>>> Mac, Linux, Chrome OS, Android, and Android WebView)? >>>>>> >>>>>> All except WebView >>>>>> >>>>>> Is this feature fully tested by web-platform-tests >>>>>> <https://chromium.googlesource.com/chromium/src/+/main/docs/testing/web_platform_tests.md> >>>>>> ? >>>>>> >>>>>> We've tested all of the primary functionality in WPT. This API has a >>>>>> lot of surface area and so we're continuing to add platform tests over >>>>>> time. >>>>>> >>>>>> https://wpt.fyi/results/?q=fledge >>>>>> >>>>>> Flag name >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> InterestGroupStorage,AdInterestGroupAPI,Fledge,AllowURNsInIframes,BiddingAndScoringDebugReportingAPI >>>>>> >>>>>> Requires code in //chrome? >>>>>> >>>>>> Yes, for settings UI controls and k-anonymity server communication. >>>>>> >>>>>> Estimated milestones >>>>>> >>>>>> Has been in Origin Trial since M101. We intend to start an >>>>>> incremental ramp to 100% in Stable with Chrome Release M115. >>>>>> >>>>>> Anticipated spec changes >>>>>> >>>>>> - >>>>>> >>>>>> We’re addressing some remaining TODOs and specifying some >>>>>> recently added non-breaking features (e.g. #304 >>>>>> <https://github.com/WICG/turtledove/issues/304>, #305 >>>>>> <https://github.com/WICG/turtledove/issues/305>, #310 >>>>>> <https://github.com/WICG/turtledove/issues/310>, #166 >>>>>> <https://github.com/WICG/turtledove/issues/166>). >>>>>> - >>>>>> >>>>>> Moving beyond our core use cases, we anticipate the need to >>>>>> support new functionality going forward. We don’t currently >>>>>> anticipate >>>>>> changes that would break backwards compatibility. >>>>>> - >>>>>> >>>>>> Support for Bidding and Auction services >>>>>> >>>>>> <https://groups.google.com/a/chromium.org/g/blink-dev/c/bGd_nPuUrUg/m/j39WQ7e2AwAJ> >>>>>> is in progress. This is a non-breaking additional feature. >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> Link to entry on the Chrome Platform Status >>>>>> >>>>>> https://chromestatus.com/feature/5733583115255808 >>>>>> >>>>>> Links to previous Intent discussions >>>>>> >>>>>> Intent to Prototype: >>>>>> >>>>>> https://groups.google.com/a/chromium.org/g/blink-dev/c/w9hm8eQCmNI >>>>>> >>>>>> Intent to Experiment: >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> https://groups.google.com/a/chromium.org/g/blink-dev/c/0VmMSsDWsFg/m/_0T5qleqCgAJ >>>>>> >>>>>> Intent to Extend Origin Trial: >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> https://groups.google.com/a/chromium.org/g/blink-dev/c/SD8Ot2gpz4g/m/A9uA-_cGAwAJ >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> https://groups.google.com/a/chromium.org/g/blink-dev/c/gpmaOi3of_w/m/SyMclFhMAAAJ >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> https://groups.google.com/a/chromium.org/g/blink-dev/c/CBrV-2DrYFI/m/RTojC6kHAgAJ >>>>>> -- >>>>>> 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/CABQTWrn8eM3wOtUY3RzmDrt7SVxR_y_6Fo02bJ%2BF1bzbwpFfkQ%40mail.gmail.com >>>>>> <https://groups.google.com/a/chromium.org/d/msgid/blink-dev/CABQTWrn8eM3wOtUY3RzmDrt7SVxR_y_6Fo02bJ%2BF1bzbwpFfkQ%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/CAP-uykDhn3EzgNacgnEExhiLwrdnc%2Bf7ZV6qMf%3DHk1ns1oHdTw%40mail.gmail.com >>>>> <https://groups.google.com/a/chromium.org/d/msgid/blink-dev/CAP-uykDhn3EzgNacgnEExhiLwrdnc%2Bf7ZV6qMf%3DHk1ns1oHdTw%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/CABQTWr%3D1ROXvBN-k6trfMvLpnE74avuc4WtmyZRrAuOHdh0zNQ%40mail.gmail.com > <https://groups.google.com/a/chromium.org/d/msgid/blink-dev/CABQTWr%3D1ROXvBN-k6trfMvLpnE74avuc4WtmyZRrAuOHdh0zNQ%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/CABQTWrmxni_nFb60tusUdO%3D1i3ixRUWC2J86qa24u6B5e0SFpw%40mail.gmail.com.
