Re: [w3ctag/design-reviews] Storage Quota Usage Details (#365)

@hober and I are looking at this during a breakout at the TAG face-to-face meeting.

So from a quick read through the explainer I think this largely seems reasonable.

-----

I'm fine with the decision taken regarding the dictionary, although I'm a little skeptical of one of the arguments put forward:
> Cost: we can’t measure if we can remove storage systems without breaking the Web.

I'd understand saying it's harder to measure, but I'm pretty skeptical of the claim that it's impossible.  I think it would require changing the sort of instrumentation being done, but I'd think it would still be possible.

That said, I think the choice of having only systems used be in the dictionary is probably good -- also because one advantage of it was missing, which is that it means that *adding* storage systems doesn't risk breaking web content by adding entries to these dictionaries.

-----

It doesn't seem like the [mechanism used to detect incognito mode](https://mishravikas.com/articles/2019-07/bypassing-anti-incognito-detection-google-chrome.html) doesn't relate to the `usageDetails` feature covered by this review -- although it is concerning and related to the feature more generally.

-- 
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
https://github.com/w3ctag/design-reviews/issues/365#issuecomment-530252199