– DRAFT –
WebDriver - February 2024

<MaksimSadym> I'll drop at 18:30 as well

AutomatedTester: I have put forward a charter extension to the WG as it is coming to an end at this month and will be working with Mike and plh to make sure it is completed.

WPT use Undefined to signal missing param

github: w3c/webdriver-bidi#642

sadym (IRC): This is a technical issue with wpt. Currently we use null for sending things over the wire. This is not always correct.
… sometimes we use the special undefined when we want to test [missed]
… my suggest is that we move to using a unified way to show undefined when new tests are written when fields. shouldnt be sent

<whimboo> Python can actually not handle null and undefined with None

whimboo: I agree we need somet
… thing better here. I mentioned this before.
… my initial proposal is we use null instead of undefined we make something that makes reading the spec and the tests the same

sadym (IRC): I was played around with something that was `optional`

whimboo: would this work as optional equal to none?
… as none and null are not equal

sadym (IRC): that would work too
… the only issue is that none is serialised to null in JS

whimboo: let's see if we can play with these in a test and see what works out best

Ability to get the default user agent (via capabilities)

github: w3c/webdriver-bidi#446

orkon: Let me introduce it. In Puppeteer we need an API to know what browser we are talking to
… I am wondering if we can do this via a capability?

automatedtester: Computed capabilities can be fine especially we do this when looking at the differences between devices. The question here is why isn't browserName good enough here?

orkon: the browsername is fine but there ar e parts of the UA that are useful to our users and we want to be able to return that

Sam Sneddon [:gsnedders]: I'm not against allowing people to match on UA
… having to start the browser to figure out if we can match is painful
… in the PR my question was around if you pass in alwaysMatch that the UA and return something else that would be weird at a protocol level
… and I don't think it would block the PR but as the discussion on Matrix showed, we need to have some discussion about how we generally want to deal with output-only capabilities when passed in as an input.

orkon: I think that I will need to have a look and improve the spec here on what we do if someone passes in a capability that is an output only capability that can never be matched

whimboo: it would make sense tohave a new issue filed around this and have a meaningful discussion around this
… as for matching we are already have ways to do matching before the browser is up as much as possible but we need a way know. this
… e.g. setWindowRect capability is missing for how we handle it

ACTION: Raise an issue around capability matching on output only capabilities

<MaksimSadym> not a problem

Support emulation of the User-Agent

github: w3c/webdriver-bidi#448

orkon: this is a feature request I filed

and puppeteer supports it
… and I am currently leaning towards closing this issue
… and there is a way that we can implement it

automatedtester: from Selenium point of view we don't need this feature and are ahppy for you to close it

whimboo: if your fine then great. we can always see about adding this in the future if there are clients that are porting from CDP and are struggling to make it work

Emit browsingContext.navigationStarted before any navigation events

github: w3c/webdriver-bidi#657

jrandolf: in the html spec that we have events that come out. Sometimes these events don't come back in an order that makes sense
… we, chrome, want to propose that we move some of these events so that they happen earlier

whimboo: for normal navigations this should be fine. I would need jgraham to review too. I am concerned about hash navigations on this
… I think we should probably look into this more deeply

jrandolf: on chromium side, we fragment navigation is sequential for us too
… the cancellation event can still happen before the started and I think we should be sending that started event
… and the started event could be faked on fragment navigation
… and have the started before erroring can occur

whimboo: could we have some use cases here so we can see the scenarios and the expectations

<gsnedders> <whimboo> "tests that require the remote..." <- w3c/webdriver#1792 and w3c/webdriver#1793 I think capture all of this?

<whimboo> AutomatedTester: we have to make the minutes

<whimboo> not sure how it works :)

<whimboo> RRSAgent (IRC): make minutes