W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-web-perf@w3.org > March 2011

Re: *Proposed* Web Performance Working Group Charter

From: Paul Bakaus <pbakaus@zynga.com>
Date: Thu, 3 Mar 2011 00:22:44 -0800
To: Alex Russell <slightlyoff@google.com>, Jason Weber <jweber@microsoft.com>
CC: Arvind Jain <arvind@google.com>, Philippe Le Hegaret <plh@w3.org>, public-web-perf <public-web-perf@w3.org>, Tony Gentilcore <tonyg@google.com>
Message-ID: <C9950D59.3C06%pbakaus@zynga.com>
+1 on frame rate. I've recently discussed this with Alex. As game
developers, we need to have better access to this kind of information.
Currently, we simply measure using setIntervals, but that's not the most
reliable source. 

In general, we need a broader set of information not only on *that*
something is slow, but *why*.

Am 03.03.11 03:23 schrieb "Alex Russell" unter <slightlyoff@google.com>:

>On Wed, Mar 2, 2011 at 12:51 PM, Jason Weber <jweber@microsoft.com> wrote:
>> I completely agree we need to improve the reporting around framerates.
>>I've been thinking about this in the context of the proposed "Display
>>Paint Notifications" specification. If the web application receives a
>>callback when the painting needs to occur instead of arbitrarily based
>>on timers, then the web application can accurately keep track of
>>framerate while also having the ability to scale down the framerate as
>>needed to provide a great experience even on lower end hardware. I
>>prefer the callback approach over a reporting API since it puts the web
>>developer in control over the framerates and experience.
>
>In the case of animations that *aren't* being driven from script, the
>callback API might give you some way of interleaving stats gathering
>with paints, but it feels punitive to make a developer do that (on the
>UI thread) when what they really want to know is "I'm dropping below
>my target framerate! HALP!".
>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: public-web-perf-request@w3.org
>>[mailto:public-web-perf-request@w3.org] On Behalf Of Alex Russell
>> Sent: Wednesday, March 02, 2011 10:59 AM
>> To: Arvind Jain
>> Cc: Philippe Le Hegaret; public-web-perf; Tony Gentilcore
>> Subject: Re: *Proposed* Web Performance Working Group Charter
>>
>> I'd like to see some metrics reported about frame rates.
>>
>> On Wed, Mar 2, 2011 at 9:21 AM, Arvind Jain <arvind@google.com> wrote:
>>> Are there any other deliverables that we should add to the charter
>>> besides these 3 new deliverables (Page Visibility, Efficient Script
>>> Yielding, and Display Paint Notifications)? If you'd like to add
>>>anything,
>>> please suggest them here (by next Tuesday).
>>> Thanks,
>>> Arvind
>>>
>>> On Fri, Feb 25, 2011 at 11:14 AM, Philippe Le Hegaret <plh@w3.org>
>>>wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Folks,
>>>>
>>>> As agreeing on Wednesday, here are the proposed changes that Arvind,
>>>> Jason and I are proposing. You can find them highlighted in
>>>>  http://www.w3.org/2011/02/webperf.html
>>>>
>>>> Plan to get this reviewed by the membership starting next week or the
>>>> week after while we start the work in the group.
>>>>
>>>> Regards,
>>>>
>>>> Philippe
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>
Received on Thursday, 3 March 2011 08:23:43 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 21:04:30 UTC