Make it optional to show UI for <a ping>

[zcorpan]

Fixes #11309.

• [x] At least two implementers are interested (and none opposed):
  • Chromium (currently doesn't show UI)
  • WebKit (currently doesn't show UI)
  • Gecko
• [x] Tests are written and can be reviewed and commented upon at:
  • N/A
• [x] Implementation bugs are filed:
  • Chromium: N/A
  • Gecko: https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=401352 (but ping not supported yet)
  • WebKit: N/A
• [x] Corresponding HTML AAM & ARIA in HTML issues & PRs: N/A
• [x] MDN issue is filed: N/A
• [x] The top of this comment includes a clear commit message to use.

(See WHATWG Working Mode: Changes for more details.)

---

/infrastructure.html ( diff ) /links.html ( diff ) /system-state.html ( diff ) /web-messaging.html ( diff ) /webappapis.html ( diff )

[npdoty]

If the spec were to no longer recommend user transparency, then you should simultaneously remove the part of the note in this section that recommends that authors use the ping attribute "so that the user agent can make the user experience more transparent". Instead, it would seem like the advantage to authors is that there would be less transparency to the user about how their activity is being tracked and less performance risk in doing that kind of tracking.

For many years this feature was justified as potentially providing privacy benefits, but if those requirements are removed, you could at least remove the pretense.

[zcorpan]

Good point, fixed.

[zcorpan]

I'm not aware of plans of it being implemented for ping.

Scripting is disabled check is used by lazy-loading, which is implemented (see wpt). However, CSS can probably be used to "ping" when a link is clicked (with :active) or when something is scrolled into view (with scroll-driven animations).

Either the CSS features need to also be have a scripting-disabled check, or the HTML features should keep working when scripting is disabled, I think.

[zcorpan]

I removed the scripting is disabled check.

[domenic]

I think we've waited long enough; feel free to merge!

[npdoty]

Did it seem like we had consensus on #11309? I've tried my best to clarify the potential harm to users and privacy-friendly sites.

[domenic]

Yes, you've made your position clear; thank you for doing that! That doesn't prevent merging changes.