16:49:25 <RRSAgent> RRSAgent has joined #webdriver
16:49:30 <RRSAgent> logging to https://www.w3.org/2026/02/11-webdriver-irc
16:49:42 <AutomatedTester> Chair: David Burns
16:49:44 <AutomatedTester> scribe: David Burns
16:49:53 <AutomatedTester> scribenick: AutomatedTester
16:50:13 <AutomatedTester> Meeting: Browser Testing and Tools WG - February 2026
16:50:30 <AutomatedTester> agenda: https://www.w3.org/wiki/WebDriver/2026-02-BiDi
16:53:34 <AutomatedTester> rrsagent, set logs world-visible
16:53:42 <AutomatedTester> rrsagent, make minutes
16:53:44 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2026/02/11-webdriver-minutes.html AutomatedTester
16:56:19 <whimboo> whimboo has joined #webdriver
16:59:40 <jimevans> jimevans has joined #webdriver
17:00:48 <jdescottes> jdescottes has joined #webdriver
17:01:00 <burg> burg has joined #webdriver
17:01:09 <burg> present+
17:01:10 <simonstewart> simonstewart has joined #webdriver
17:01:17 <jdescottes> present+
17:01:18 <AutomatedTester> present+
17:01:42 <simonstewart> present+
17:01:42 <jimevans> present+
17:01:45 <whimboo> present+
17:02:47 <AutomatedTester> topic: Scrollbar emulation
17:03:03 <sadym> present+
17:03:15 <sasha> sasha has joined #webdriver
17:03:17 <AutomatedTester> github: https://github.com/w3c/webdriver-bidi/pull/1050
17:04:06 <sasha> present+
17:04:28 <tidoust> present+
17:04:29 <jgraham> jgraham has joined #webdriver
17:04:33 <jgraham> present+
17:04:52 <AutomatedTester> sadym: this is what we discussed 3 weeks ago about scrollbar emulation
17:05:03 <jgraham> RRSAgent, make minutes
17:05:04 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2026/02/11-webdriver-minutes.html jgraham
17:05:19 <AutomatedTester> ... I think we have consensus. What I wanted to bring in this PR to be more generic
17:05:57 <AutomatedTester> ... <discusses there a number of different items to store data>
17:06:25 <jgraham> q+
17:06:26 <AutomatedTester> ... we currently have a singleton for the remote end but not for the session
17:06:40 <AutomatedTester> ack next
17:07:16 <AutomatedTester> jgraham: I only briefly looked in the PR but it looked like a good way to store data for the we are setting up in the session
17:07:34 <AutomatedTester> ... and this will lead to being more consistent with how we look up data
17:08:24 <AutomatedTester> sadym: this is a blocker for all emulation that we are going to specify. I would like to reuse this as I build out the other emulation. Please can people unblock me by reviewing this PR
17:08:30 <AutomatedTester> q?
17:08:30 <whimboo> q+
17:08:33 <AutomatedTester> ack next
17:09:08 <AutomatedTester> whimboo: I am on PTO over the next week. If others can help review. I looked and it looked ok for now
17:09:40 <AutomatedTester> jgraham: I think it would be good to have the config item split out into a new PR and then have a PR for emulation that then uses it
17:10:09 <AutomatedTester> sadym: this would be odd and it would need an example of how to use it so that's why its in that PR
17:10:43 <AutomatedTester> jgraham: it's fine to be in the PR but ideal case would be PR for infra and a PR for emulation to see it being used but I can do it in 1 PR
17:10:45 <AutomatedTester> q?
17:11:11 <AutomatedTester> topic: Proxy configuration
17:11:20 <AutomatedTester> github: https://github.com/w3c/webdriver/issues/1920
17:11:53 <AutomatedTester> sadym: we discussed this in the last meeting. I would like the PR to be reviewed. It uses the existing description of what proxy values
17:12:24 <AutomatedTester> ... it's an extension of the existing wording. I tried to update the wording but it didn't make much sense
17:12:36 <AutomatedTester> q?
17:13:46 <AutomatedTester> topic: Screens emulation
17:14:00 <AutomatedTester> github: https://github.com/w3c/window-management/issues/147
17:14:36 <AutomatedTester> sadym: I started looking at screen emulation and have started work on the bidi spec work
17:14:43 <jgraham> q+
17:14:46 <AutomatedTester> ... I have a generic question for consumers
17:15:08 <AutomatedTester> ... there are physical and there emulated screens
17:15:29 <AutomatedTester> ... do we want to have a way to move between physical and emulated screen
17:15:44 <AutomatedTester> ... and do we want to have atomically handle screen emulation
17:16:01 <AutomatedTester> q?
17:16:05 <AutomatedTester> ack next
17:16:55 <sadym> q+
17:17:01 <AutomatedTester> jgraham: reading this issue, I don't think we should handle the idea of reconfiguring the OS. We should only allow browser
17:17:13 <AutomatedTester> ... this leads to physical and emulated screens
17:17:38 <AutomatedTester> ... this could hit limitations like a emulated screen is bigger than a physcail screen
17:18:26 <AutomatedTester> ... and I am not sure I understand the trade off of atomic vs the other way
17:18:28 <AutomatedTester> ack next
17:19:00 <AutomatedTester> sadym: implementation for us is emulated screens in headful or headless screens
17:19:27 <AutomatedTester> ... in headful we can only use physical screens
17:20:20 <AutomatedTester> ... I want to also make sure that if we want to have a split webview for a presentation to make sure the 2 windows are in sync
17:20:34 <AutomatedTester> ... I can see there are tradeoffs
17:20:36 <AutomatedTester> q?
17:20:58 <jgraham> q+
17:21:23 <sadym> in Chrome, we can support real devices only in headful mode, and emulate screens only in headless mode
17:21:45 <AutomatedTester> ack next
17:22:43 <AutomatedTester> jgraham: I think would be to document this in the issue. I don;lt have enough gecko knowledge to know what we can/can't do but if we can have the use cases documented and what chromium can also do that would be quite useful
17:22:49 <AutomatedTester> q?
17:23:22 <AutomatedTester> topic: screencasting
17:23:33 <AutomatedTester> github: https://github.com/w3c/webdriver-bidi/issues/636
17:25:01 <AutomatedTester> sasha: this is a call for a review of the proposal that I have put up. I do have 1 question which how do we handle audio. The get media can also get the audio. Gecko can't handle the audio just yet but I wanted to see if there was concensus on if it is needed or not?
17:25:07 <sadym> q+
17:25:12 <AutomatedTester> ack next
17:26:08 <AutomatedTester> sadym: I haven't read the PR. I will look. For clarification, you use media encoding for creating the file
17:26:32 <AutomatedTester> sasha: we get the stream and then encode it into a blob that we eventually save into the file
17:26:42 <AutomatedTester> sadym: I wonder how we will test this in WPT
17:26:57 <sasha> q+
17:27:03 <AutomatedTester> ack next
17:27:27 <AutomatedTester> sasha: in playwright they do a way to do this type of testing
17:27:33 <jgraham> q+
17:27:43 <AutomatedTester> ack next
17:28:12 <AutomatedTester> jgraham: this won't be easy but there are way to test media in wpt already
17:28:51 <AutomatedTester> ... it will be hard but not impossible to test this
17:28:58 <AutomatedTester> q?
17:29:24 <AutomatedTester> topic: Bypass CSP
17:29:36 <AutomatedTester> github: https://github.com/w3c/webdriver-bidi/pull/1068
17:30:20 <AutomatedTester> jdescottes: I opened a PR on bidi. This works in the same way that other config commands works
17:30:52 <AutomatedTester> ... and we have a hook that allows people to check that CSP
17:31:09 <AutomatedTester> ... there is also a PR against CSP spec that I want to check with this group
17:31:20 <AutomatedTester> ... <discusses cases>
17:31:53 <AutomatedTester> ... should we only do the simple CSP at document initialisation or should it do everything
17:32:16 <sadym> q+
17:32:17 <AutomatedTester> ... I wonder if we want to be thorough or just the simple case?
17:32:20 <AutomatedTester> ack next
17:33:32 <AutomatedTester> sadym: I don;t know what we do... but I would be surprised if we do deep changes to fetch but I think we should do the proper thing from the beginning and implementations do their best effort
17:33:37 <AutomatedTester> q?
17:33:57 <AutomatedTester> RRSAgent, make minutes
17:33:58 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2026/02/11-webdriver-minutes.html AutomatedTester
17:34:55 <AutomatedTester> topic: Wait for request animation frame on action commands
17:35:06 <AutomatedTester> github: https://github.com/w3c/webdriver/issues/1944
17:35:55 <AutomatedTester> jdescottes: this last topic is to do with handling actions that will scroll the element into view
17:36:26 <AutomatedTester> ... and the browser does the scrolls in an async way
17:36:55 <sadym> q+
17:37:29 <AutomatedTester> ... so how do you want to handle this... or do we just do the simple way because old tests are already handling the timing and we might suddnely break things
17:37:34 <AutomatedTester> ack next
17:38:07 <jimevans> q+
17:38:26 <AutomatedTester> sadym: this sounds like a breaking change that I would rather have jgraham or simonstewart to answer
17:38:28 <jgraham> q+
17:38:31 <AutomatedTester> ack next
17:39:29 <jugglinmike> jugglinmike has joined #webdriver
17:39:31 <AutomatedTester> jimevans: I would prefer people to use bidi but I think we need to solve scrolling in bidi so not sure we can have bidi as a solution just yet
17:39:36 <jugglinmike> present+ jugglinmike
17:39:41 <AutomatedTester> ack next
17:39:42 <jdescottes> q+
17:40:18 <AutomatedTester> jgraham: I was looking at CSSOM has scroll into view returns a promise but I don't think it's handled
17:40:53 <AutomatedTester> ... I think there is a bit of history that when we change things like this that people rely on current behaviour
17:41:16 <AutomatedTester> ... it would be good to test the change on a large test suite
17:41:22 <AutomatedTester> ack next
17:43:16 <jgraham> q+
17:43:26 <AutomatedTester> jdescottes: if we update classic it would need an opt ok. If there is a promise on the spec then great. There are a use case where a series of JS fired when the scroll happened. I am happy to have bidi do scroll into a view that relies on this promise and if there are more complicated cases that they handle that themselves
17:43:52 <AutomatedTester> ack next
17:44:36 <AutomatedTester> jgraham: for actions we handle the click event before we move on to the next part of the action chain
17:45:04 <AutomatedTester> ... so then with a scroll we wait for the promise to return and then then event loop to spin
17:45:49 <jdescottes> q+
17:45:50 <AutomatedTester> ... I think there would be some logical idea that after the scroll action that we spin the event loop to handle events that could have been created by that action
17:45:56 <AutomatedTester> ack next
17:46:17 <AutomatedTester> jdescottes: would we consider this for classic or just bidi
17:46:58 <AutomatedTester> jgraham: if we put scroll into actions which would make it new so there would not be a compatibility things
17:48:01 <AutomatedTester> ... which means we can work in classic or classic. If we were changing the API that is there its hard to existing API because people could be relying ont hat behaviour
17:48:25 <AutomatedTester> ... so we can add it here and have it spin the event loop
17:49:48 <jgraham> RRSAgent: make minutes
17:49:49 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2026/02/11-webdriver-minutes.html jgraham
18:04:15 <spectranaut_> spectranaut_ has joined #webdriver
19:28:28 <jimevans> jimevans has joined #webdriver
20:01:27 <Zakim> Zakim has left #webdriver
20:02:54 <jimevans> jimevans has joined #webdriver
20:32:58 <jimevans> jimevans has joined #webdriver
22:53:06 <karlcow> karlcow has joined #webdriver