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

RE: New Resource and User Timing Test Cases

From: Jatinder Mann <jmann@microsoft.com>
Date: Wed, 23 Jan 2013 22:14:14 +0000
To: "Boris Zbarsky (bzbarsky@mit.edu)" <bzbarsky@mit.edu>, "'public-web-perf@w3.org'" <public-web-perf@w3.org>
Message-ID: <03b018fb60654991b0a4f86e71ac9665@BLUPR03MB065.namprd03.prod.outlook.com>
On 12/4/12 4:12 PM, Boris Zbarsky wrote:
> The failures are as follows:
> http://w3c-test.org/webperf/tests/submission/Microsoft/PageVisibility/test_minimize.htm 
> http://w3c-test.org/webperf/tests/submission/Microsoft/PageVisibility/test_tab_state_change.htm
> The subframe visibility states are checked before they've actually been 
> set while recursing down the document tree.  If the test used event 
> listeners on those documents to check their visibility state it would 
> see them going into the hidden state.

These test cases have been updated to register the visibilitychange event on the subdocuments themselves, prior they were testing the visibilitychange by registering on the parent. Please review and let me know if this works.

On 12/4/12 4:12 PM, Boris Zbarsky wrote:
> One note: the test descriptions are completely wrong for these 
> testcases.  The behavior being tested for has nothing to do with event 
> bubbling.  Might be good to fix the test descriptions...

Which description in particular did you want me to update?

There was also a discussion of adding a test that would have a visibilitychange event on both the subdocument and parent, and then check if either the parent is still in the old state when the child fires or if the child is in the old state when the parent fires. That is, that there is not an observable time when both documents' states have been updated but only one event has fired. I plan to push that test up within a week.

Received on Wednesday, 23 January 2013 22:16:53 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 21:04:34 UTC