- From: Mike Wasserman <notifications@github.com>
- Date: Tue, 09 May 2023 14:31:15 -0700
- To: w3c/screen-orientation <screen-orientation@noreply.github.com>
- Cc: Subscribed <subscribed@noreply.github.com>
Received on Tuesday, 9 May 2023 21:31:20 UTC
Thanks for your work here, @marcoscaceres. We should absolutely prevent abuse akin to your compelling [example](https://github.com/w3c/screen-orientation/pull/218#issuecomment-1290029378). The most apparent risk is breaking uses of Element.requestFullscreen() and Screen.Orientation.lock() from one transient user activation. Long term, https://github.com/whatwg/fullscreen/issues/186 seems nice, but we should avoid breaking existing sites. My best naive idea is an internal slot to permit locking orientation without transient user activation shortly after a fullscreen request (akin to the slot discussed in https://github.com/whatwg/html/issues/8490). I'm not aware of other use cases for locking orientation without consuming a transient user activation (e.g. auto-advancing media queue, games, mapping). Still, attempting to measure potential impact seems like a prerequisite to making a potentially disruptive change. Collecting new Chromium metrics beyond the basic [use counter](https://chromestatus.com/metrics/feature/timeline/popularity/559) might help. -- Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub: https://github.com/w3c/screen-orientation/pull/218#issuecomment-1540918745 You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread. Message ID: <w3c/screen-orientation/pull/218/c1540918745@github.com>
Received on Tuesday, 9 May 2023 21:31:20 UTC