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

Re: navigationStart in NavigationTiming

From: Arvind Jain <arvind@google.com>
Date: Wed, 1 May 2013 21:54:42 -0700
Message-ID: <CAOYaDdMnLCSUOn5diomwtj06Grh8B7WV3EG+iXy+hxZ=odwohA@mail.gmail.com>
To: Boris Zbarsky <bzbarsky@mit.edu>
Cc: Jatinder Mann <jmann@microsoft.com>, "public-web-perf@w3.org" <public-web-perf@w3.org>
We can special case "initial about:blank" page in the navigationStart
definition - not a big deal. But could you look at the spec and see if it
makes sense when we have a page that was not navigated to?

How do things like navigation type or navigation start make sense when
there is no navigation? And do we update the processing model? The spec
fundamentally assumes there is a navigation.

It'd be great if you could suggest the actual wording to incorporate the
"initial about:blank" page such that the entire spec makes sense.


On Wed, May 1, 2013 at 6:36 PM, Boris Zbarsky <bzbarsky@mit.edu> wrote:

> On 5/1/13 9:12 PM, Arvind Jain wrote:
>> I mean to say the behavior is unspecified for "about:blank"
> I frankly see no reason to leave this unspecified.  Worst-case, just
> define it to all 0 for initial about:blank.
> -Boris
Received on Thursday, 2 May 2013 04:55:10 UTC

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