- From: Danyao Wang <notifications@github.com>
- Date: Tue, 10 Dec 2019 16:45:03 -0800
- To: w3c/payment-handler <payment-handler@noreply.github.com>
- Cc: Subscribed <subscribed@noreply.github.com>
Received on Wednesday, 11 December 2019 00:45:06 UTC
> > I'm not following your point. > > Could be that my point is totally wrong :) But I took you to mean that origin trials would give you feedback on whether 1p cookie jar is needed, whether storage access API prompts were appealing / tolerable / intolerable to users, etc, and since Chrome in some cases is, and in more cases soon, will be doing its own thing regarding 1p vs 3p and Storage Access API, I didn't know how "generalizable" the feedback from the origin trials would be. But if I'm misunderstanding or off base, please, disregard :) Ah I see. You're right, the prompt friction of Chrome's specific UI will not be generalizable. I need to figure out what Chrome will be doing on Storage Access API. I think knowing how critical is 1P cookie jar to payment flows, whether there are workable alternatives in a 3P context, and the general user perception of payment handler window may be transferrable lessons. -- You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread. Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub: https://github.com/w3c/payment-handler/issues/351#issuecomment-564325962
Received on Wednesday, 11 December 2019 00:45:06 UTC