[Presentation API] add url property to blink PresentationConnection object

[Presentation API] add url property to blink PresentationConnection object

Make PresentationConnection.idl consistent with latest spec

https://w3c.github.io/presentation-api/#interface-presentationconnection

BUG=654110

[zhaobin, 2016-10-17 18:25:15]

Description was changed from

==========
[Presentation API] add url property to blink PresentationConnection object

BUG=654110
==========

to

==========
[Presentation API] add url property to blink PresentationConnection object

Make PresentationConnection.idl consistent with latest spec

https://w3c.github.io/presentation-api/#interface-presentationconnection

BUG=654110
==========

[zhaobin, 2016-10-17 18:28:04]

zhaobin@chromium.org changed reviewers:
+ mfoltz@chromium.org, mlamouri@chromium.org

[zhaobin, 2016-10-17 18:28:45]

The CQ bit was checked by zhaobin@chromium.org to run a CQ dry run

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2016-10-17 18:29:11]

Dry run: CQ is trying da patch. Follow status at
 
https://chromium-cq-status.appspot.com/v2/patch-status/codereview.chromium.or...

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2016-10-17 20:50:54]

The CQ bit was unchecked by commit-bot@chromium.org

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2016-10-17 20:50:54]

Dry run: Try jobs failed on following builders:
  win_chromium_rel_ng on master.tryserver.chromium.win (JOB_FAILED,
http://build.chromium.org/p/tryserver.chromium.win/builders/win_chromium_rel_...)

[mlamouri (slow - plz ping), 2016-10-18 16:44:25]

lg2m but do we have a intent to ship for this? It is adding a new web exposed
attribute.

[mark a. foltz, 2016-10-18 23:57:38]

On 2016/10/18 at 16:44:25, mlamouri wrote:
> lg2m but do we have a intent to ship for this? It is adding a new web exposed
attribute.

Implmentation looks good but we should send an intent to implement and ship to
blink-dev@ before landing this.  I can send you a template document to fill in.

[mark a. foltz, 2016-12-13 23:41:30]

I think this was combined with the other change for multiple URL support.  Can
this issue be closed now?

[zhaobin, 2016-12-13 23:48:13]

On 2016/12/13 23:41:30, mark a. foltz wrote:
> I think this was combined with the other change for multiple URL support.  Can
> this issue be closed now?

Mounir has commented that the multiple url patch
(https://codereview.chromium.org/2552343009/) is too large and we may split. So
updated this one since it may land seperately before the multi url patch. Do you
prefer this goes together with multiple url patch?

[mark a. foltz, 2016-12-13 23:53:38]

On 2016/12/13 at 23:48:13, zhaobin wrote:
> On 2016/12/13 23:41:30, mark a. foltz wrote:
> > I think this was combined with the other change for multiple URL support. 
Can
> > this issue be closed now?
> 
> Mounir has commented that the multiple url patch
(https://codereview.chromium.org/2552343009/) is too large and we may split. So
updated this one since it may land seperately before the multi url patch. Do you
prefer this goes together with multiple url patch?

The Blink OWNERS requested we landed these features together so developers could
feature detect the new constructor.

[mlamouri (slow - plz ping), 2016-12-14 00:19:07]

On 2016/12/13 at 23:53:38, mfoltz wrote:
> On 2016/12/13 at 23:48:13, zhaobin wrote:
> > On 2016/12/13 23:41:30, mark a. foltz wrote:
> > > I think this was combined with the other change for multiple URL support. 
Can
> > > this issue be closed now?
> > 
> > Mounir has commented that the multiple url patch
(https://codereview.chromium.org/2552343009/) is too large and we may split. So
updated this one since it may land seperately before the multi url patch. Do you
prefer this goes together with multiple url patch?
> 
> The Blink OWNERS requested we landed these features together so developers
could feature detect the new constructor.

FWIW, I l-g-t-m the other CL. I think...

[zhaobin, 2016-12-14 00:23:38]

On 2016/12/14 00:19:07, mlamouri wrote:
> On 2016/12/13 at 23:53:38, mfoltz wrote:
> > On 2016/12/13 at 23:48:13, zhaobin wrote:
> > > On 2016/12/13 23:41:30, mark a. foltz wrote:
> > > > I think this was combined with the other change for multiple URL
support. 
> Can
> > > > this issue be closed now?
> > > 
> > > Mounir has commented that the multiple url patch
> (https://codereview.chromium.org/2552343009/) is too large and we may split.
So
> updated this one since it may land seperately before the multi url patch. Do
you
> prefer this goes together with multiple url patch?
> > 
> > The Blink OWNERS requested we landed these features together so developers
> could feature detect the new constructor.
> 
> FWIW, I l-g-t-m the other CL. I think...

Thanks a lot! Closing this.