Extension APIs should be also exposed under `browser.*` to match the WebExtensions spec
Reported by
impinb...@gmail.com,
Dec 31 2017
|
||||
Issue descriptionThe WebExtensions spec [1] specifies that all its methods are available under the `browser` global namespace. Could all the Chrome APIs with equivalents in the spec be ported over to the `browser` global namespace? One key difference to note while adding this is that the WebExtensions spec is largely promise-based, while the `chrome.*` APIs are callback-based. Oh, and as a stop-gap solution, Mozilla has had a polyfill [2] out for a while to help people use the same extension code in Chrome and Firefox (and Edge) both. [1]: https://browserext.github.io/browserext/ [2]: https://github.com/mozilla/webextension-polyfill
,
Dec 31 2017
TE@, this is a feature request for "Platform>Extensions>API" component.
,
Jan 2 2018
,
Jan 2 2018
Thanks for filing the issue! As per the comment#2 and #3 considering it as Feature request and marking it as Untriaged.
,
Jan 2 2018
As a side note, could the bug wizards (the "New Issue" button as well as crbug.com/new) include an option for web devs to file feature requests? Those are topical here, and guides typically point technical feature requests here rather than the chromium-discuss forums (where most general user requests go). ----- Isiah Meadows me@isiahmeadows.com Looking for web consulting? Or a new website? Send me an email and we can get started. www.isiahmeadows.com
,
Jan 19 2018
Assigning to Devlin to respond.
,
Jan 7
This is probably a duplicate of: https://bugs.chromium.org/p/chromium/issues/detail?id=328932
,
Jan 7
Not really - it's kind of the other half of the same token. This is about exposing the APIs under the spec's namespace, while that is about exposing promise APIs in addition to callback APIs. |
||||
►
Sign in to add a comment |
||||
Comment 1 by impinb...@gmail.com
, Dec 31 2017