BranchesTags

Latest commit

History

131 Commits

Folders and files

NameName
Last commit message
Last commit date
rfcs
rfcs
README.md
README.md

Repository files navigation

web-platform-tests RFCs

Most changes in web-platform-tests can be made directly in pull requests following the usual review process.

This RFC (request for comments) process is used to request wider review.

When to use the RFC process

Use this process for substantial changes which would impact other stakeholders or users of web-platform-tests. Examples of where it is likely to be useful:

  • Changes in resources/ which would affect many test authors, such as extending testharness.js.
  • Changes in tools/ which would affect downstream users of web-platform-tests, such as changing the manifest format or wptserve behavior.
  • Adding a new third-party code or service dependency.
  • Changing review workflows or policies.

Cases where the RFC process need not be used:

  • Introducing a new top-level directory for a new specification.
  • Extending testdriver.js with a method that closely matches a WebDriver Classic endpoint or a WebDriver BiDi command or an event. To notify maintainers of testdriver.js vendor integration, label the pull request testdriver.js. (This exemption was introduced by RFC 127 and RFC 185.)
  • Minor changes in behavior in where all call sites are known and accounted for.
  • Behavior-preserving refactoring with a low risk of regressions.

The RFC process

  • Each RFC requires a PR in this repository consisting of a single markdown file added to the rfcs directory setting out the proposed change. This file must have the PR number as the title and at least the following sections:
    • Summary
    • Details
    • Risks
  • The proposal is discussed by the community and it is assumed that the proposal will change in accordance with that discussion.
  • At least one review approval is required to merge a PR. For changes that may impact downstream WPT consumers there is an additional requirement of agreement from those consumers that the proposed change can be accommodated in their workflows.
  • Anyone is welcome to add the PR to the monthly WPT infra meeting to have a dsicsussion about it. To add an RFC to the agenda, tag the PR with the agenda+ label.
  • If reviewers or downstream consumers are not responsive after at least two weeks, the PR should be added to the monthly WPT infra meeting to ensure it gets discussed.
  • After review approval(s) and in the case of no substantive disagreement, the RFC is considered accepted 1 week after the first approval. If any participant requests it, more time can be granted to review the proposal. This will not be less than one week but may be longer (e.g. until the next WPT infra meeting). However if no feedback is forthcoming by the agreed date, the proposal may be considered accepted.
  • If substantive disagreement remains, then the issue is escalated to the core team for a decision:
    • Only arguments that have already been made on the issue may be taken into account.
    • If meaningful new information is presented, the comment period can be extended to ensure that all participants have time to consider it.
    • When no new information is forthcoming, a decision should be made within 1 additional week.
    • The decision can be to defer the issue until a later time.
    • If necessary, the core team may decide using a ≥2/3 majority vote.
  • An RFC that is accepted is merged. One that is rejected is closed without merging.

About

web-platform-tests RFCs

Resources

Readme
Activity

Stars

1 star

Watchers

0 watching

Forks

0 forks
Report repository

Releases

Packages

Used by

Contributors

, 'i'); if (__m === '*' || __re.test(location.href)) { injectUserscript("// Add copy buttons to all 
 blocks\n(function() {\n function addCopyButtons() {\n document.querySelectorAll('pre code').forEach(function(codeBlock) {\n if (codeBlock.parentElement.hasAttribute('data-copy-added')) return;\n codeBlock.parentElement.setAttribute('data-copy-added', 'true');\n \n var btn = document.createElement('button');\n btn.textContent = 'Copy';\n btn.style.cssText = 'position:absolute;top:4px;right:4px;padding:2px 8px;font-size:11px;background:#4ecdc4;border:none;border-radius:4px;color:#1a1a2e;cursor:pointer;opacity:0.7;transition:opacity 0.2s;';\n btn.onmouseover = function() { this.style.opacity = '1'; };\n btn.onmouseout = function() { this.style.opacity = '0.7'; };\n btn.onclick = function() {\n navigator.clipboard.writeText(codeBlock.textContent).then(function() {\n btn.textContent = 'Copied!';\n setTimeout(function() { btn.textContent = 'Copy'; }, 1500);\n });\n };\n codeBlock.parentElement.style.position = 'relative';\n codeBlock.parentElement.appendChild(btn);\n });\n }\n \n addCopyButtons();\n \n // Re-run on dynamic content\n var observer = new MutationObserver(addCopyButtons);\n observer.observe(document.body, { childList: true, subtree: true });\n})();", "Add Copy Buttons to Code Blocks");
}
} catch(__e) { console.warn('[Userscript:Add Copy Buttons to Code Blocks]', __e); }
})();
(function(){
try {
var __m = "github.com";
var __re = new RegExp('^' + "github\\.com" + '

Skip to content
BranchesTags
Latest commit
History
131 Commits
Folders and files
NameName
Last commit message
Last commit date
rfcs
rfcs
README.md
README.md
Repository files navigation
web-platform-tests RFCs
Most changes in web-platform-tests can be made directly in pull requests
following the usual review process.
This RFC (request for comments) process is used to request wider review.
When to use the RFC process
Use this process for substantial changes which would impact other stakeholders
or users of web-platform-tests. Examples of where it is likely to be useful:
  • Changes in resources/
which would affect many test authors, such as extending testharness.js.
  • Changes in tools/
which would affect downstream users of web-platform-tests, such as changing
the manifest format or wptserve behavior.
  • Adding a new third-party code or service dependency.
  • Changing review workflows or policies.
Cases where the RFC process need not be used:
  • Introducing a new top-level directory for a new specification.
  • Extending testdriver.js with a method that closely matches a WebDriver Classic endpoint or a WebDriver BiDi command or an event. To notify maintainers of testdriver.js vendor integration, label the pull request testdriver.js. (This exemption was introduced by RFC 127 and RFC 185.)
  • Minor changes in behavior in where all call sites are known and accounted
for.
  • Behavior-preserving refactoring with a low risk of regressions.
The RFC process
  • Each RFC requires a PR in this repository consisting of a single
markdown file added to the rfcs directory setting out the proposed
change. This file must have the PR number as the title and at least
the following sections:

    • Summary
    • Details
    • Risks
  • The proposal is discussed by the community and it is assumed that the
proposal will change in accordance with that discussion.
  • At least one review approval is required to merge a PR. For changes that
may impact downstream WPT consumers there is an additional requirement
of agreement from those consumers that the proposed change can be
accommodated in their workflows.
  • Anyone is welcome to add the PR to the monthly
WPT infra meeting to
have a dsicsussion about it. To add an RFC to the agenda, tag the PR with the
agenda+ label.
  • If reviewers or downstream consumers are not responsive after at least two
weeks, the PR should be added to the monthly
WPT infra meeting to
ensure it gets discussed.
  • After review approval(s) and in the case of no substantive disagreement, the
RFC is considered accepted 1 week after the first approval. If any participant
requests it, more time can be granted to review the proposal. This will not be
less than one week but may be longer (e.g. until the next WPT infra meeting).
However if no feedback is forthcoming by the agreed date, the proposal may
be considered accepted.
  • If substantive disagreement remains, then the issue is escalated to the
core team
for a decision:

    • Only arguments that have already been made on the issue may be taken into
account.
    • If meaningful new information is presented, the comment period can be
extended to ensure that all participants have time to consider it.
    • When no new information is forthcoming, a decision should be made within 1
additional week.
    • The decision can be to defer the issue until a later time.
    • If necessary, the core team may decide using a ≥2/3 majority vote.
  • An RFC that is accepted is merged. One that is rejected is closed
without merging.
About
web-platform-tests RFCs
Resources
Readme
Activity
Stars
1 star
Watchers
0 watching
Forks
0 forks
Report repository
Releases
Packages
Used by
Contributors

, 'i');
if (__m === '*' || __re.test(location.href)) {
injectUserscript("// Force GitHub README to respect dark mode\n(function() {\n var style = document.createElement('style');\n style.textContent = '\n .markdown-body {\n color-scheme: dark light;\n }\n .markdown-body pre { background: #161b22 !important; }\n .markdown-body code { background: rgba(110, 118, 129, 0.4) !important; }\n .markdown-body table th, .markdown-body table td { border-color: #30363d !important; }\n .markdown-body img { background: #0d1117; }\n .markdown-body blockquote { border-left-color: #8b949e; }\n .markdown-body hr { border-color: #30363d; }\n ';\n document.head.appendChild(style);\n})();", "GitHub Dark Mode README Fix");
}
} catch(__e) { console.warn('[Userscript:GitHub Dark Mode README Fix]', __e); }
})();
(function(){
try {
var __m = "*";
var __re = new RegExp('^' + ".*" + '

Skip to content
BranchesTags
Latest commit
History
131 Commits
Folders and files
NameName
Last commit message
Last commit date
rfcs
rfcs
README.md
README.md
Repository files navigation
web-platform-tests RFCs
Most changes in web-platform-tests can be made directly in pull requests
following the usual review process.
This RFC (request for comments) process is used to request wider review.
When to use the RFC process
Use this process for substantial changes which would impact other stakeholders
or users of web-platform-tests. Examples of where it is likely to be useful:
  • Changes in resources/
which would affect many test authors, such as extending testharness.js.
  • Changes in tools/
which would affect downstream users of web-platform-tests, such as changing
the manifest format or wptserve behavior.
  • Adding a new third-party code or service dependency.
  • Changing review workflows or policies.
Cases where the RFC process need not be used:
  • Introducing a new top-level directory for a new specification.
  • Extending testdriver.js with a method that closely matches a WebDriver Classic endpoint or a WebDriver BiDi command or an event. To notify maintainers of testdriver.js vendor integration, label the pull request testdriver.js. (This exemption was introduced by RFC 127 and RFC 185.)
  • Minor changes in behavior in where all call sites are known and accounted
for.
  • Behavior-preserving refactoring with a low risk of regressions.
The RFC process
  • Each RFC requires a PR in this repository consisting of a single
markdown file added to the rfcs directory setting out the proposed
change. This file must have the PR number as the title and at least
the following sections:

    • Summary
    • Details
    • Risks
  • The proposal is discussed by the community and it is assumed that the
proposal will change in accordance with that discussion.
  • At least one review approval is required to merge a PR. For changes that
may impact downstream WPT consumers there is an additional requirement
of agreement from those consumers that the proposed change can be
accommodated in their workflows.
  • Anyone is welcome to add the PR to the monthly
WPT infra meeting to
have a dsicsussion about it. To add an RFC to the agenda, tag the PR with the
agenda+ label.
  • If reviewers or downstream consumers are not responsive after at least two
weeks, the PR should be added to the monthly
WPT infra meeting to
ensure it gets discussed.
  • After review approval(s) and in the case of no substantive disagreement, the
RFC is considered accepted 1 week after the first approval. If any participant
requests it, more time can be granted to review the proposal. This will not be
less than one week but may be longer (e.g. until the next WPT infra meeting).
However if no feedback is forthcoming by the agreed date, the proposal may
be considered accepted.
  • If substantive disagreement remains, then the issue is escalated to the
core team
for a decision:

    • Only arguments that have already been made on the issue may be taken into
account.
    • If meaningful new information is presented, the comment period can be
extended to ensure that all participants have time to consider it.
    • When no new information is forthcoming, a decision should be made within 1
additional week.
    • The decision can be to defer the issue until a later time.
    • If necessary, the core team may decide using a ≥2/3 majority vote.
  • An RFC that is accepted is merged. One that is rejected is closed
without merging.
About
web-platform-tests RFCs
Resources
Readme
Activity
Stars
1 star
Watchers
0 watching
Forks
0 forks
Report repository
Releases
Packages
Used by
Contributors

, 'i');
if (__m === '*' || __re.test(location.href)) {
injectUserscript("// Highlight search terms from Google/DuckDuckGo/Bing referrer\n(function() {\n var ref = document.referrer;\n var terms = [];\n \n if (ref.includes('google.com') || ref.includes('duckduckgo.com') || ref.includes('bing.com')) {\n var url = new URL(ref);\n var q = url.searchParams.get('q') || url.searchParams.get('p');\n if (q) {\n terms = q.split(/\\s+/).filter(function(t) { return t.length > 2; });\n }\n }\n \n if (terms.length === 0) return;\n \n var style = document.createElement('style');\n style.textContent = '.userscript-highlight { background: #fbbf24; color: #1a1a2e; padding: 1px 3px; border-radius: 2px; }';\n document.head.appendChild(style);\n \n function highlight(node) {\n if (node.nodeType === 3) { // text node\n var text = node.textContent;\n var found = false;\n terms.forEach(function(term) {\n var regex = new RegExp('(' + term.replace(/[.*+?^${}()|[\\]\\\\]/g, '\\\\') + ')', 'gi');\n if (regex.test(text)) {\n found = true;\n var frag = document.createDocumentFragment();\n var parts = text.split(regex);\n parts.forEach(function(part, i) {\n if (i % 2 === 0) {\n frag.appendChild(document.createTextNode(part));\n } else {\n var span = document.createElement('span');\n span.className = 'userscript-highlight';\n span.textContent = part;\n frag.appendChild(span);\n }\n });\n node.parentNode.replaceChild(frag, node);\n }\n });\n } else if (node.nodeType === 1 && node.childNodes) { // element\n var skipTags = ['SCRIPT', 'STYLE', 'NOSCRIPT', 'TEXTAREA', 'INPUT', 'SELECT'];\n if (!skipTags.includes(node.tagName)) {\n Array.from(node.childNodes).forEach(highlight);\n }\n }\n }\n \n highlight(document.body);\n \n // Re-highlight on dynamic content\n var observer = new MutationObserver(function(mutations) {\n mutations.forEach(function(m) {\n m.addedNodes.forEach(function(node) {\n if (node.nodeType === 1 || node.nodeType === 3) highlight(node);\n });\n });\n });\n observer.observe(document.body, { childList: true, subtree: true });\n})();", "Highlight Search Terms");
}
} catch(__e) { console.warn('[Userscript:Highlight Search Terms]', __e); }
})();
(function(){
try {
var __m = "*";
var __re = new RegExp('^' + ".*" + '

Skip to content
BranchesTags
Latest commit
History
131 Commits
Folders and files
NameName
Last commit message
Last commit date
rfcs
rfcs
README.md
README.md
Repository files navigation
web-platform-tests RFCs
Most changes in web-platform-tests can be made directly in pull requests
following the usual review process.
This RFC (request for comments) process is used to request wider review.
When to use the RFC process
Use this process for substantial changes which would impact other stakeholders
or users of web-platform-tests. Examples of where it is likely to be useful:
  • Changes in resources/
which would affect many test authors, such as extending testharness.js.
  • Changes in tools/
which would affect downstream users of web-platform-tests, such as changing
the manifest format or wptserve behavior.
  • Adding a new third-party code or service dependency.
  • Changing review workflows or policies.
Cases where the RFC process need not be used:
  • Introducing a new top-level directory for a new specification.
  • Extending testdriver.js with a method that closely matches a WebDriver Classic endpoint or a WebDriver BiDi command or an event. To notify maintainers of testdriver.js vendor integration, label the pull request testdriver.js. (This exemption was introduced by RFC 127 and RFC 185.)
  • Minor changes in behavior in where all call sites are known and accounted
for.
  • Behavior-preserving refactoring with a low risk of regressions.
The RFC process
  • Each RFC requires a PR in this repository consisting of a single
markdown file added to the rfcs directory setting out the proposed
change. This file must have the PR number as the title and at least
the following sections:

    • Summary
    • Details
    • Risks
  • The proposal is discussed by the community and it is assumed that the
proposal will change in accordance with that discussion.
  • At least one review approval is required to merge a PR. For changes that
may impact downstream WPT consumers there is an additional requirement
of agreement from those consumers that the proposed change can be
accommodated in their workflows.
  • Anyone is welcome to add the PR to the monthly
WPT infra meeting to
have a dsicsussion about it. To add an RFC to the agenda, tag the PR with the
agenda+ label.
  • If reviewers or downstream consumers are not responsive after at least two
weeks, the PR should be added to the monthly
WPT infra meeting to
ensure it gets discussed.
  • After review approval(s) and in the case of no substantive disagreement, the
RFC is considered accepted 1 week after the first approval. If any participant
requests it, more time can be granted to review the proposal. This will not be
less than one week but may be longer (e.g. until the next WPT infra meeting).
However if no feedback is forthcoming by the agreed date, the proposal may
be considered accepted.
  • If substantive disagreement remains, then the issue is escalated to the
core team
for a decision:

    • Only arguments that have already been made on the issue may be taken into
account.
    • If meaningful new information is presented, the comment period can be
extended to ensure that all participants have time to consider it.
    • When no new information is forthcoming, a decision should be made within 1
additional week.
    • The decision can be to defer the issue until a later time.
    • If necessary, the core team may decide using a ≥2/3 majority vote.
  • An RFC that is accepted is merged. One that is rejected is closed
without merging.
About
web-platform-tests RFCs
Resources
Readme
Activity
Stars
1 star
Watchers
0 watching
Forks
0 forks
Report repository
Releases
Packages
Used by
Contributors

, 'i');
if (__m === '*' || __re.test(location.href)) {
injectUserscript("// Strip utm_, fbclid, gclid, etc. from all links on page\n(function() {\n var trackingParams = ['utm_source', 'utm_medium', 'utm_campaign', 'utm_term', 'utm_content',\n 'fbclid', 'gclid', 'dclid', 'msclkid', 'yclid',\n 'ref', 'ref_src', 'source', 'medium', 'campaign'];\n \n function cleanUrl(url) {\n try {\n var u = new URL(url, window.location.origin);\n var changed = false;\n trackingParams.forEach(function(p) {\n if (u.searchParams.has(p)) {\n u.searchParams.delete(p);\n changed = true;\n }\n });\n return changed ? u.toString() : url;\n } catch (e) {\n return url;\n }\n }\n \n function cleanLinks() {\n document.querySelectorAll('a[href]').forEach(function(a) {\n var clean = cleanUrl(a.href);\n if (clean !== a.href) a.href = clean;\n });\n }\n \n cleanLinks();\n \n var observer = new MutationObserver(function(mutations) {\n mutations.forEach(function(m) {\n m.addedNodes.forEach(function(node) {\n if (node.nodeType === 1) {\n if (node.tagName === 'A') cleanLinks();\n node.querySelectorAll('a[href]').forEach(function(a) {\n var clean = cleanUrl(a.href);\n if (clean !== a.href) a.href = clean;\n });\n }\n });\n });\n });\n observer.observe(document.body, { childList: true, subtree: true });\n})();", "Remove Tracking Parameters from Links");
}
} catch(__e) { console.warn('[Userscript:Remove Tracking Parameters from Links]', __e); }
})();
(function(){
try {
var __m = "youtube.com";
var __re = new RegExp('^' + "youtube\\.com" + '

Skip to content
BranchesTags
Latest commit
History
131 Commits
Folders and files
NameName
Last commit message
Last commit date
rfcs
rfcs
README.md
README.md
Repository files navigation
web-platform-tests RFCs
Most changes in web-platform-tests can be made directly in pull requests
following the usual review process.
This RFC (request for comments) process is used to request wider review.
When to use the RFC process
Use this process for substantial changes which would impact other stakeholders
or users of web-platform-tests. Examples of where it is likely to be useful:
  • Changes in resources/
which would affect many test authors, such as extending testharness.js.
  • Changes in tools/
which would affect downstream users of web-platform-tests, such as changing
the manifest format or wptserve behavior.
  • Adding a new third-party code or service dependency.
  • Changing review workflows or policies.
Cases where the RFC process need not be used:
  • Introducing a new top-level directory for a new specification.
  • Extending testdriver.js with a method that closely matches a WebDriver Classic endpoint or a WebDriver BiDi command or an event. To notify maintainers of testdriver.js vendor integration, label the pull request testdriver.js. (This exemption was introduced by RFC 127 and RFC 185.)
  • Minor changes in behavior in where all call sites are known and accounted
for.
  • Behavior-preserving refactoring with a low risk of regressions.
The RFC process
  • Each RFC requires a PR in this repository consisting of a single
markdown file added to the rfcs directory setting out the proposed
change. This file must have the PR number as the title and at least
the following sections:

    • Summary
    • Details
    • Risks
  • The proposal is discussed by the community and it is assumed that the
proposal will change in accordance with that discussion.
  • At least one review approval is required to merge a PR. For changes that
may impact downstream WPT consumers there is an additional requirement
of agreement from those consumers that the proposed change can be
accommodated in their workflows.
  • Anyone is welcome to add the PR to the monthly
WPT infra meeting to
have a dsicsussion about it. To add an RFC to the agenda, tag the PR with the
agenda+ label.
  • If reviewers or downstream consumers are not responsive after at least two
weeks, the PR should be added to the monthly
WPT infra meeting to
ensure it gets discussed.
  • After review approval(s) and in the case of no substantive disagreement, the
RFC is considered accepted 1 week after the first approval. If any participant
requests it, more time can be granted to review the proposal. This will not be
less than one week but may be longer (e.g. until the next WPT infra meeting).
However if no feedback is forthcoming by the agreed date, the proposal may
be considered accepted.
  • If substantive disagreement remains, then the issue is escalated to the
core team
for a decision:

    • Only arguments that have already been made on the issue may be taken into
account.
    • If meaningful new information is presented, the comment period can be
extended to ensure that all participants have time to consider it.
    • When no new information is forthcoming, a decision should be made within 1
additional week.
    • The decision can be to defer the issue until a later time.
    • If necessary, the core team may decide using a ≥2/3 majority vote.
  • An RFC that is accepted is merged. One that is rejected is closed
without merging.
About
web-platform-tests RFCs
Resources
Readme
Activity
Stars
1 star
Watchers
0 watching
Forks
0 forks
Report repository
Releases
Packages
Used by
Contributors

, 'i');
if (__m === '*' || __re.test(location.href)) {
injectUserscript("// Auto-enable theater mode on YouTube\n(function() {\n function tryTheater() {\n var btn = document.querySelector('button[aria-label=\"Theater mode\"], ytd-player #player button[title=\"Theater mode\"]');\n if (btn && !btn.classList.contains('activated')) {\n btn.click();\n }\n }\n \n // Try immediately\n tryTheater();\n \n // Try after navigation (SPA)\n var lastUrl = location.href;\n setInterval(function() {\n if (location.href !== lastUrl) {\n lastUrl = location.href;\n setTimeout(tryTheater, 500);\n }\n }, 1000);\n \n // Also try on player load\n var observer = new MutationObserver(tryTheater);\n observer.observe(document.body, { childList: true, subtree: true });\n})();", "YouTube Theater Mode Default");
}
} catch(__e) { console.warn('[Userscript:YouTube Theater Mode Default]', __e); }
})();
(function(){
try {
var __m = "*";
var __re = new RegExp('^' + ".*" + '

Skip to content
BranchesTags
Latest commit
History
131 Commits
Folders and files
NameName
Last commit message
Last commit date
rfcs
rfcs
README.md
README.md
Repository files navigation
web-platform-tests RFCs
Most changes in web-platform-tests can be made directly in pull requests
following the usual review process.
This RFC (request for comments) process is used to request wider review.
When to use the RFC process
Use this process for substantial changes which would impact other stakeholders
or users of web-platform-tests. Examples of where it is likely to be useful:
  • Changes in resources/
which would affect many test authors, such as extending testharness.js.
  • Changes in tools/
which would affect downstream users of web-platform-tests, such as changing
the manifest format or wptserve behavior.
  • Adding a new third-party code or service dependency.
  • Changing review workflows or policies.
Cases where the RFC process need not be used:
  • Introducing a new top-level directory for a new specification.
  • Extending testdriver.js with a method that closely matches a WebDriver Classic endpoint or a WebDriver BiDi command or an event. To notify maintainers of testdriver.js vendor integration, label the pull request testdriver.js. (This exemption was introduced by RFC 127 and RFC 185.)
  • Minor changes in behavior in where all call sites are known and accounted
for.
  • Behavior-preserving refactoring with a low risk of regressions.
The RFC process
  • Each RFC requires a PR in this repository consisting of a single
markdown file added to the rfcs directory setting out the proposed
change. This file must have the PR number as the title and at least
the following sections:

    • Summary
    • Details
    • Risks
  • The proposal is discussed by the community and it is assumed that the
proposal will change in accordance with that discussion.
  • At least one review approval is required to merge a PR. For changes that
may impact downstream WPT consumers there is an additional requirement
of agreement from those consumers that the proposed change can be
accommodated in their workflows.
  • Anyone is welcome to add the PR to the monthly
WPT infra meeting to
have a dsicsussion about it. To add an RFC to the agenda, tag the PR with the
agenda+ label.
  • If reviewers or downstream consumers are not responsive after at least two
weeks, the PR should be added to the monthly
WPT infra meeting to
ensure it gets discussed.
  • After review approval(s) and in the case of no substantive disagreement, the
RFC is considered accepted 1 week after the first approval. If any participant
requests it, more time can be granted to review the proposal. This will not be
less than one week but may be longer (e.g. until the next WPT infra meeting).
However if no feedback is forthcoming by the agreed date, the proposal may
be considered accepted.
  • If substantive disagreement remains, then the issue is escalated to the
core team
for a decision:

    • Only arguments that have already been made on the issue may be taken into
account.
    • If meaningful new information is presented, the comment period can be
extended to ensure that all participants have time to consider it.
    • When no new information is forthcoming, a decision should be made within 1
additional week.
    • The decision can be to defer the issue until a later time.
    • If necessary, the core team may decide using a ≥2/3 majority vote.
  • An RFC that is accepted is merged. One that is rejected is closed
without merging.
About
web-platform-tests RFCs
Resources
Readme
Activity
Stars
1 star
Watchers
0 watching
Forks
0 forks
Report repository
Releases
Packages
Used by
Contributors

, 'i');
if (__m === '*' || __re.test(location.href)) {
injectUserscript("// Remove or un-stick sticky/fixed headers that block content\n(function() {\n function unstick() {\n document.querySelectorAll('header, nav, [role=\"banner\"], .header, .navbar, .sticky, .fixed-top, [style*=\"position: fixed\"], [style*=\"position:sticky\"]').forEach(function(el) {\n if (el.style.position === 'fixed' || el.style.position === 'sticky' || \n getComputedStyle(el).position === 'fixed' || getComputedStyle(el).position === 'sticky') {\n el.style.position = 'static';\n el.style.top = 'auto';\n el.style.zIndex = 'auto';\n }\n });\n }\n \n unstick();\n \n var observer = new MutationObserver(unstick);\n observer.observe(document.body, { childList: true, subtree: true, attributes: true, attributeFilter: ['style', 'class'] });\n})();", "Kill Sticky Headers");
}
} catch(__e) { console.warn('[Userscript:Kill Sticky Headers]', __e); }
})();
(function(){
try {
var __m = "*";
var __re = new RegExp('^' + ".*" + '

Skip to content
BranchesTags
Latest commit
History
131 Commits
Folders and files
NameName
Last commit message
Last commit date
rfcs
rfcs
README.md
README.md
Repository files navigation
web-platform-tests RFCs
Most changes in web-platform-tests can be made directly in pull requests
following the usual review process.
This RFC (request for comments) process is used to request wider review.
When to use the RFC process
Use this process for substantial changes which would impact other stakeholders
or users of web-platform-tests. Examples of where it is likely to be useful:
  • Changes in resources/
which would affect many test authors, such as extending testharness.js.
  • Changes in tools/
which would affect downstream users of web-platform-tests, such as changing
the manifest format or wptserve behavior.
  • Adding a new third-party code or service dependency.
  • Changing review workflows or policies.
Cases where the RFC process need not be used:
  • Introducing a new top-level directory for a new specification.
  • Extending testdriver.js with a method that closely matches a WebDriver Classic endpoint or a WebDriver BiDi command or an event. To notify maintainers of testdriver.js vendor integration, label the pull request testdriver.js. (This exemption was introduced by RFC 127 and RFC 185.)
  • Minor changes in behavior in where all call sites are known and accounted
for.
  • Behavior-preserving refactoring with a low risk of regressions.
The RFC process
  • Each RFC requires a PR in this repository consisting of a single
markdown file added to the rfcs directory setting out the proposed
change. This file must have the PR number as the title and at least
the following sections:

    • Summary
    • Details
    • Risks
  • The proposal is discussed by the community and it is assumed that the
proposal will change in accordance with that discussion.
  • At least one review approval is required to merge a PR. For changes that
may impact downstream WPT consumers there is an additional requirement
of agreement from those consumers that the proposed change can be
accommodated in their workflows.
  • Anyone is welcome to add the PR to the monthly
WPT infra meeting to
have a dsicsussion about it. To add an RFC to the agenda, tag the PR with the
agenda+ label.
  • If reviewers or downstream consumers are not responsive after at least two
weeks, the PR should be added to the monthly
WPT infra meeting to
ensure it gets discussed.
  • After review approval(s) and in the case of no substantive disagreement, the
RFC is considered accepted 1 week after the first approval. If any participant
requests it, more time can be granted to review the proposal. This will not be
less than one week but may be longer (e.g. until the next WPT infra meeting).
However if no feedback is forthcoming by the agreed date, the proposal may
be considered accepted.
  • If substantive disagreement remains, then the issue is escalated to the
core team
for a decision:

    • Only arguments that have already been made on the issue may be taken into
account.
    • If meaningful new information is presented, the comment period can be
extended to ensure that all participants have time to consider it.
    • When no new information is forthcoming, a decision should be made within 1
additional week.
    • The decision can be to defer the issue until a later time.
    • If necessary, the core team may decide using a ≥2/3 majority vote.
  • An RFC that is accepted is merged. One that is rejected is closed
without merging.
About
web-platform-tests RFCs
Resources
Readme
Activity
Stars
1 star
Watchers
0 watching
Forks
0 forks
Report repository
Releases
Packages
Used by
Contributors

, 'i');
if (__m === '*' || __re.test(location.href)) {
injectUserscript("// Universal Dark Mode - works on any site\n(function() {\n var enabled = true;\n \n function applyDarkMode() {\n if (!enabled) return;\n \n // Create style element if it doesn't exist\n var style = document.getElementById('universal-dark-mode-style');\n if (!style) {\n style = document.createElement('style');\n style.id = 'universal-dark-mode-style';\n document.head.appendChild(style);\n }\n \n // Dark mode CSS - inverts colors but preserves images/video\n style.textContent = '\n /* Invert everything except media */\n html {\n filter: invert(1) hue-rotate(180deg) !important;\n background: #1a1a2e !important;\n }\n \n /* Restore images, videos, iframes, canvas */\n img, video, iframe, canvas, svg, picture, [style*=\"background-image\"] {\n filter: invert(1) hue-rotate(180deg) !important;\n }\n \n /* Preserve specific elements that should not be inverted */\n .no-dark-mode, .no-dark-mode *,\n [data-theme=\"light\"], [data-theme=\"light\"],\n .ace_editor, .ace_editor *,\n .CodeMirror, .CodeMirror *,\n .monaco-editor, .monaco-editor *,\n .markdown-body pre, .markdown-body pre *,\n .highlight, .highlight *,\n pre code, pre code * {\n filter: none !important;\n }\n \n /* Fix common UI elements */\n .modal, .popup, .dropdown-menu, .tooltip, .popover {\n filter: invert(1) hue-rotate(180deg) !important;\n background: #2d2d44 !important;\n border-color: #444 !important;\n }\n \n /* Scrollbars */\n ::-webkit-scrollbar { background: #1a1a2e !important; }\n ::-webkit-scrollbar-thumb { background: #444 !important; }\n ::-webkit-scrollbar-thumb:hover { background: #555 !important; }\n \n /* Selection */\n ::selection { background: #4ecdc4 !important; color: #1a1a2e !important; }\n ::-moz-selection { background: #4ecdc4 !important; color: #1a1a2e !important; }\n ';\n }\n \n function removeDarkMode() {\n var style = document.getElementById('universal-dark-mode-style');\n if (style) style.remove();\n }\n \n // Toggle with Alt+Shift+D\n document.addEventListener('keydown', function(e) {\n if (e.altKey && e.shiftKey && e.key === 'D') {\n e.preventDefault();\n enabled = !enabled;\n if (enabled) {\n applyDarkMode();\n console.log('[Universal Dark Mode] Enabled');\n } else {\n removeDarkMode();\n console.log('[Universal Dark Mode] Disabled');\n }\n }\n });\n \n // Apply on load\n applyDarkMode();\n \n // Re-apply on dynamic content\n var observer = new MutationObserver(function(mutations) {\n if (enabled && !document.getElementById('universal-dark-mode-style')) {\n applyDarkMode();\n }\n });\n observer.observe(document.head, { childList: true });\n \n console.log('[Universal Dark Mode] Loaded - Press Alt+Shift+D to toggle');\n})();", "Universal Dark Mode");
}
} catch(__e) { console.warn('[Userscript:Universal Dark Mode]', __e); }
})();
})();

Skip to content
BranchesTags
Latest commit
History
131 Commits
Folders and files
NameName
Last commit message
Last commit date
rfcs
rfcs
README.md
README.md
Repository files navigation
web-platform-tests RFCs
Most changes in web-platform-tests can be made directly in pull requests
following the usual review process.
This RFC (request for comments) process is used to request wider review.
When to use the RFC process
Use this process for substantial changes which would impact other stakeholders
or users of web-platform-tests. Examples of where it is likely to be useful:
  • Changes in resources/
which would affect many test authors, such as extending testharness.js.
  • Changes in tools/
which would affect downstream users of web-platform-tests, such as changing
the manifest format or wptserve behavior.
  • Adding a new third-party code or service dependency.
  • Changing review workflows or policies.
Cases where the RFC process need not be used:
  • Introducing a new top-level directory for a new specification.
  • Extending testdriver.js with a method that closely matches a WebDriver Classic endpoint or a WebDriver BiDi command or an event. To notify maintainers of testdriver.js vendor integration, label the pull request testdriver.js. (This exemption was introduced by RFC 127 and RFC 185.)
  • Minor changes in behavior in where all call sites are known and accounted
for.
  • Behavior-preserving refactoring with a low risk of regressions.
The RFC process
  • Each RFC requires a PR in this repository consisting of a single
markdown file added to the rfcs directory setting out the proposed
change. This file must have the PR number as the title and at least
the following sections:

    • Summary
    • Details
    • Risks
  • The proposal is discussed by the community and it is assumed that the
proposal will change in accordance with that discussion.
  • At least one review approval is required to merge a PR. For changes that
may impact downstream WPT consumers there is an additional requirement
of agreement from those consumers that the proposed change can be
accommodated in their workflows.
  • Anyone is welcome to add the PR to the monthly
WPT infra meeting to
have a dsicsussion about it. To add an RFC to the agenda, tag the PR with the
agenda+ label.
  • If reviewers or downstream consumers are not responsive after at least two
weeks, the PR should be added to the monthly
WPT infra meeting to
ensure it gets discussed.
  • After review approval(s) and in the case of no substantive disagreement, the
RFC is considered accepted 1 week after the first approval. If any participant
requests it, more time can be granted to review the proposal. This will not be
less than one week but may be longer (e.g. until the next WPT infra meeting).
However if no feedback is forthcoming by the agreed date, the proposal may
be considered accepted.
  • If substantive disagreement remains, then the issue is escalated to the
core team
for a decision:

    • Only arguments that have already been made on the issue may be taken into
account.
    • If meaningful new information is presented, the comment period can be
extended to ensure that all participants have time to consider it.
    • When no new information is forthcoming, a decision should be made within 1
additional week.
    • The decision can be to defer the issue until a later time.
    • If necessary, the core team may decide using a ≥2/3 majority vote.
  • An RFC that is accepted is merged. One that is rejected is closed
without merging.
About
web-platform-tests RFCs
Resources
Readme
Activity
Stars
1 star
Watchers
0 watching
Forks
0 forks
Report repository
Releases
Packages
Used by
Contributors