Re: [w3ctag/design-reviews] Incubation: `CrashReportStorage` API (Issue #1129)

christianliebel left a comment (w3ctag/design-reviews#1129)

@domfarolino Thanks for your proposal. We understand this is the "storage" part of a larger effort called [Crash Reporting API](https://github.com/wicg/crash-reporting). The `CrashReportStorage` API would allow authors to provide additional context to be added to a crash report, should the site crash later.

Please note that the following review focuses on the `CrashReportStorage` API in the context of the Crash Reporting API. Specifically, this is not a review of the Crash Reporting API as a whole.

The API surface is minimal and fulfills the requirements of your use case. As your proposal deviates quite a bit from usual storage APIs (not asynchronous, write-only), we would like to ask you to reconsider the API's name. For example, `CrashReportContext` may work to meet developers' expectations.

If developers forget to remove a key after a critical operation, the information will stick around for the rest of the storage's lifetime, which is "TBD," but probably more ephemeral than `sessionStorage`. As the information will remain allocated in memory, we ask you to define storage limits or eviction criteria more clearly.

The security and privacy self-review questionnaire is incomplete. We do not expect issues, though, as authors can already send crash reporting context to backend services using alternative ways. We would appreciate it if you could add them (for example, [`fetchLater()`](https://github.com/whatwg/fetch/pull/1647#event-18880737603) as suggested by @yoavweiss) to your "Alternatives considered" section and explain why your API is still needed.

The question of which documents can add crash report context (e.g., in a micro-frontend scenario with multiple same-origin iframes loaded) is unanswered, but it seems quite critical to produce helpful crash reports.

All in all, we're closing this early review as **validated** and welcome another review once the proposal is more polished.

-- 
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
https://github.com/w3ctag/design-reviews/issues/1129#issuecomment-3232683292
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.

Message ID: <w3ctag/design-reviews/issues/1129/3232683292@github.com>