Re: Proposed new test for Navigation Timing: Monolitic Clock from James Graham on 2012-11-30 (public-web-perf@w3.org from November 2012)

From: James Graham <jgraham@opera.com>
Date: Fri, 30 Nov 2012 21:03:59 +0100 (CET)
To: Boris Zbarsky <bzbarsky@MIT.EDU>
cc: public-web-perf@w3.org
Message-ID: <alpine.DEB.2.02.1211302100520.619@sirius>

On Fri, 30 Nov 2012, Boris Zbarsky wrote:

> On 11/30/12 1:32 PM, Philippe Le Hegaret wrote:
>> I updated the implementation report to include the idlharness.js
>> results:
>>   http://www.w3.org/2012/04/navigation_timing_cr_results.html
>
> Thanks!  That test is testing for various aspects of Window which are not 
> strictly relevant to this spec.  It should probably not do that... On the 
> other hand, it tests for secureConnectionStart, which is good: nothing else 
> in the test suite does.  ;)

Yes, idlharness.js based tests will always test for various aspects of 
WebIDL and the window object and stuff. That's a deliberate (and 
unavoidable) consequence of the design.

If failures are being caused by behaviour unrelated to Navigation Timing 
itself, those failures should not block Rec. track progress.

Received on Friday, 30 November 2012 20:04:44 UTC