W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-web-perf@w3.org > April 2013

RE: [Resource Timing] Initiator Types

From: Jatinder Mann <jmann@microsoft.com>
Date: Tue, 9 Apr 2013 23:45:36 +0000
To: James Simonsen <simonjam@chromium.org>, "public-web-perf@w3.org" <public-web-perf@w3.org>
Message-ID: <3c78d7e2b0d84befaf552a2cb3b3f07e@BY2PR03MB074.namprd03.prod.outlook.com>
James,

The working group had agreed on defining the <audio> and <video> resource behavior in more detail in the Resource Timing Level 2 spec. I have gone ahead and removed those examples from Section 4.1 and also added a note indicating that those resources are covered in the Resource Timing L2 and not the L1 version of the spec. Please review the changes here: https://dvcs.w3.org/hg/webperf/raw-file/tip/specs/ResourceTiming/Overview.html.

I also uploaded a draft of the Resource Timing Level 2 specification here: https://dvcs.w3.org/hg/webperf/raw-file/tip/specs/ResourceTiming2/Overview.html. Aside from the title, it has the same text as L1 at the moment. Once we've agreed on the expected behavior of the <audio> and <video> resources, I can update the L2 spec.

Thanks,
Jatinder

From: James Simonsen [mailto:simonjam@chromium.org]
Sent: Wednesday, March 20, 2013 6:08 PM
To: public-web-perf@w3.org
Cc: public-web-perf
Subject: Re: [Resource Timing] Initiator Types

Sorry to revive this thread from the dead.

At one point, we'd explicitly removed <audio> and <video> tags from Resource Timing. This thread appears to be where we agreed to remove them.

Since then, we removed the enum of initiator types, so it's no longer clear that <audio> and <video> are missing. Worse, we still list them as examples of things that should show up in Resource Timing in section 4.1.

I think we should explicitly say these elements are excluded for the reasons listed below. It's already on our charter to support them in Resource Timing 2.

James

On Wed, Aug 31, 2011 at 1:42 PM, Nic Jansma <Nic.Jansma@microsoft.com<mailto:Nic.Jansma@microsoft.com>> wrote:
As a follow-up to our conf call today, we agreed to remove resources associated with VIDEO and AUDIO tags (INITIATOR_AUDIO and INITIATOR_VIDEO) for now, as there are several complex scenarios associated with downloading resources via those tags (streaming scenarios, range requests, seeking, etc).  We may be able to tackle it better with guidance from another W3C group.


From: public-web-perf-request@w3.org<mailto:public-web-perf-request@w3.org> [mailto:public-web-perf-request@w3.org<mailto:public-web-perf-request@w3.org>] On Behalf Of James Simonsen
Sent: Monday, August 29, 2011 5:37 PM
To: public-web-perf
Subject: [Resource Timing] Initiator Types

I have a few questions on the initiator types:

INITIATOR_AUDIO
INITIATOR_VIDEO

These ones are a little tricky to time. They don't necessarily load like other resources. Sometimes they're never-ending streams. Sometimes they're only partially loaded (user skips ahead). And sometimes they're only loaded lazily when the user hits play. I could imagine a situation where we had to open multiple connections too, which would make some of the timing attributes ambiguous. What are we supposed to do in these cases?

It's possible that Resource Timing isn't sufficient for describing these elements. Maybe they should have their own class of entries on the Performance Timeline.
Received on Tuesday, 9 April 2013 23:46:19 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 21:04:35 UTC