HIQaH! QaH! TAG!

I'm requesting a TAG review of the app history API proposal.

The web's existing history API is problematic for a number of reasons, which makes it hard to use for web applications. This proposal introduces a new window.appHistory API, which is more directly usable by web application developers to address the use cases they have for history introspection, mutation, and observation/interception.

The proposed API layers on top of the existing API and specification infrastructure, with well-defined interaction points. The main differences are that it is scoped to the current origin and frame, and it is designed to be pleasant to use instead of being a historical accident with many sharp edges

• Explainer¹ (minimally containing user needs and example code): https://github.com/WICG/app-history/blob/main/README.md
• Security and Privacy self-review²: https://github.com/WICG/app-history/blob/main/security-privacy-questionnaire.md
• GitHub repo (if you prefer feedback filed there): https://github.com/WICG/app-history
• Primary contacts (and their relationship to the specification):
  • Domenic Denicola (@domenic), Google
• Organization/project driving the design: Google
• External status/issue trackers for this feature (publicly visible, e.g. Chrome Status): none yet, will update when we start prototyping

Further details:

• I have reviewed the TAG's API Design Principles
• The group where the incubation/design work on this is being done (or is intended to be done in the future): WICG
• The group where standardization of this work is intended to be done ("unknown" if not known): WHATWG
• Existing major pieces of multi-stakeholder review or discussion of this design: none of this design, although there is a lot of discussion of how the existing history API is bad (which the explainer links to throughout)
• Major unresolved issues with or opposition to this design: no major issues yet. There are a number of minor TODOs scattered throughout the document and issue tracker; thoughts on the best ways of resolving those would be appreciated.
• This work is being funded by: Google

You should also know that...

The intent here is not to provide any substantial new capabilities, but instead provide a more ergonomic and interoperable API for manipulating history. See especially our discussion of interop goals and building this on a solid foundation at the bottom of the explainer's Goals section

We'd prefer the TAG provide feedback as (please delete all but the desired option):

🐛 open issues in our GitHub repo for each point of feedback