RFC 128: Consume User Activation

[marcoscaceres]

See details in the proposed .md.

tl;dr: this is a proposal to add...

• change on WPT side: WIP: Add consume_user_activation() to testdriver.js wpt#37176

 /**
  * Consumes the user activation
  *
  * Matches the behavior of the `Consume User Activation of window`
  * as proposed in: https://github.com/w3c/webdriver/pull/1695
  *
  * Which corresponds to these steps in HTML:
  * https://html.spec.whatwg.org/#consume-user-activation
  *
  * @param {WindowProxy} context - Browsing context in which to run the
  *                                call.
  * @returns {Promise<boolean>} fulfilled when user activation is consumed.
  */
 consume_user_activation(context=null) {
     return window.test_driver_internal.consume_user_activation(context);
 },

[Ms2ger]

Is this covered by #127?

[foolip]

Is this covered by #127?

After both that and w3c/webdriver#1695 are landed, yes. But I think we can keep this as its own RFC to not depend on any of that.

[foolip]

Per https://github.com/web-platform-tests/rfcs#the-rfc-process we can merge this if there's no further feedback in 1 week.

[jgraham]

I don't think it makes sense to land this without the WebDriver PR landing. Without that PR, the details of this API are underspecified and it doesn't meet our bar for inclusion.

[marcoscaceres]

That's ok @jgraham (and maybe we can get that landed also within a week? 🙏).

As we have multiple implementers interested, who do we need to bug over on the Web Driver side to get things moving?

[jcscottiii]

This RFC is good to go now that the PR is merged right?
@jgraham @foolip

[jgraham]

Per policy we no longer require an RFC for testdriver additions that correspond directly to WebDriver endpoints. So we can either merge this or not, but in any case it doesn't block adding the feature.