Re: [blink-dev] Intent to Ship: WebXR Device API

adding public-privacy@w3.org to the thread for visibility.

Regards,
Pranjal

On Thu, Oct 10, 2019 at 9:57 AM 'Chris Wilson' via blink-dev <
blink-dev@chromium.org> wrote:

> Also, the Immersive Web Working Group invited the W3C Privacy Interest
> Group to its meeting over a year ago to discuss, and we incubated the list
> of concerns and mitigations at
> https://github.com/immersive-web/privacy-and-security for a long time
> before incorporating this guidance into the Web XR Device API.  (So in
> short, yes, there has been a significant amount of privacy review, inside
> and outside the WG.)
>
> On Thu, Oct 10, 2019 at 9:49 AM 'Mounir Lamouri' via blink-dev <
> blink-dev@chromium.org> wrote:
>
>> Hi,
>>
>> This API has been reviewed following the usual Chrome launch process
>> which includes privacy and security reviews.
>>
>> Regarding the Origin Trial feedback, there isn't any outstanding feedback
>> (usual situation). The Origin Trial allowed us to confirm that many
>> websites are interested by the API and are able to use it. The W3C Working
>> Group also has members that are direct consumers of the API. In my
>> experience, OT feedback can be substantial enough to share when a website
>> A/B test a new API but in this case, there is nothing to A/B test with.
>>
>> -- Mounir
>>
>> On Thu, 10 Oct 2019 at 04:38, Daniel Bratell <bratell.d@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Can a censored version of the origin trial feedback be made public if
>>> it's just some specifics you need to keep Google internal?
>>>
>>> /Daniel
>>> On 2019-10-08 18:53, Yoav Weiss wrote:
>>>
>>> *LGTM1*
>>>
>>>
>>> On Thu, Oct 3, 2019 at 11:20 PM Brandon Jones <bajones@google.com>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Thu, Oct 3, 2019 at 11:47 AM Yoav Weiss <yoav@yoav.ws> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Can you render that document public?
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Sam tells me that the doc that contains origin trial feedback includes
>>>> specific usage metrics that should not be shared publicly. Google employees
>>>> having issues accessing the doc internally should let us know.
>>>>
>>>
>>> Looking at the doc, highlights seems to be that the API was mostly used
>>> in Canary, and only few developers answered the developer survey at the end
>>> of it. At the same time, most of those that did were supportive of the API
>>> shape and its ease of use.
>>> While I'd have loved to see more "real" usage (as would you, I'm sure),
>>> I guess that means that no major issues were found with the initial design.
>>>
>>>
>>>> What's your sense regarding the API's stability and likelihood of
>>>>> breaking changes?
>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>> This has been a major focus for us, and we're feeling confident that
>>>> the API that we intend to ship here will be stable. In fact we "rebooted"
>>>> the API at one point with the primary purpose of ensuring better forward
>>>> compatibility. We've made sure to take into account API feedback from
>>>> developers, various platform ergonomics advisors, and the W3C TAG. We
>>>> involved most major VR platform owners in the API's creation, validated
>>>> that it can be implemented against all major native APIs (including OpenXR,
>>>> which should cover an increasing number of devices and OSes as time goes
>>>> on) and ensured that in cases where we believe that there's a chance that
>>>> the native ecosystem may change course we are well positioned to
>>>> accommodate it in a non-breaking way. Additionally we've done multiple
>>>> experiments to ensure that the API can be extended to accommodate new
>>>> hardware functionality as it becomes available/popular, such as
>>>> environmental tracking with Augmented Reality, and established a spec
>>>> modules system within our group to allow for more agile development of said
>>>> features.
>>>>
>>>> No API can be guaranteed to be fully future proof, of course, but I'm
>>>> personally quite proud of the work our group has done to ensure the best
>>>> possible compatibility with such a rapidly evolving area of tech.
>>>>
>>>>
>>> That's good to know, thanks!
>>> --
>>> 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 blink-dev+unsubscribe@chromium.org.
>>> To view this discussion on the web visit
>>> https://groups.google.com/a/chromium.org/d/msgid/blink-dev/CACj%3DBEhiCEkarrT2OitET9XwfG64ovijns3VhbOt9%2BZEYXxWyw%40mail.gmail.com
>>> <https://groups.google.com/a/chromium.org/d/msgid/blink-dev/CACj%3DBEhiCEkarrT2OitET9XwfG64ovijns3VhbOt9%2BZEYXxWyw%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 blink-dev+unsubscribe@chromium.org.
>> To view this discussion on the web visit
>> https://groups.google.com/a/chromium.org/d/msgid/blink-dev/CA%2B-LeH9LPLdyu4Ce49%3DReATebZRNS3Xi%2BX%3DHZJeMk1G8DRLjNg%40mail.gmail.com
>> <https://groups.google.com/a/chromium.org/d/msgid/blink-dev/CA%2B-LeH9LPLdyu4Ce49%3DReATebZRNS3Xi%2BX%3DHZJeMk1G8DRLjNg%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 blink-dev+unsubscribe@chromium.org.
> To view this discussion on the web visit
> https://groups.google.com/a/chromium.org/d/msgid/blink-dev/CAJK2wqWQsx_zu8pGb3KKTxWcJcHFU7ZctA_Xfm3R37KfosqP-Q%40mail.gmail.com
> <https://groups.google.com/a/chromium.org/d/msgid/blink-dev/CAJK2wqWQsx_zu8pGb3KKTxWcJcHFU7ZctA_Xfm3R37KfosqP-Q%40mail.gmail.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer>
> .
>