W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-web-perf@w3.org > October 2012

Re: [NavigationTiming2] Comments and questions about the Navigation Timing 2 draft

From: Boris Zbarsky <bzbarsky@MIT.EDU>
Date: Thu, 11 Oct 2012 00:19:29 -0400
Message-ID: <507648D1.30807@mit.edu>
To: Ilya Grigorik <igrigorik@google.com>
CC: public-web-perf@w3.org
On 10/10/12 11:42 PM, Ilya Grigorik wrote:
> Interesting, thanks! I think the intuitive definition for 99.9% of
> people who do not live inside the graphics stack is the last one that
> you suggested, which is the "user sees something, anything...". Granted,
> I think you're hinting at the fact that even that is not 100% accurate
> due to hardware and other factors that are outside of our control

Keeping in mind that I do _not_ live inside the graphics stack, so may 
be totally wrong about this, I suspect it's plausible to report the time 
of the first time you told your graphics hardware to actually go ahead 
and put stuff on screen.  How much time passes between then and things 
actually appearing on screen is hard to determine, I suspect.  See 
http://superuser.com/a/419167 for example.  :(

But again, this brings me back to the real question: why do people want 
this value?  Whether it's OK to report misleading (due to hardware 
latency) things, and to what extent they can be misleading, really 
depends on the use cases people plan to put this to.

Is the idea that changing a web page in a way that reduces this value is 
something to strive for?  Is it just a feel-good kind of thing so we can 
say we're providing it?  Something else?

Received on Thursday, 11 October 2012 04:19:58 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 21:04:33 UTC