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

Re: [Resource Timing] Initial “about blank” for iframe

From: Arvind Jain <arvind@google.com>
Date: Wed, 8 May 2013 05:58:05 -0700
Message-ID: <CAOYaDdPE0XR_rndpO0OEiTw_6hzeTO+5HyA_7Yo=R4HjJ9N7oA@mail.gmail.com>
To: "Deng, Pan" <pan.deng@intel.com>
Cc: "public-web-perf@w3.org" <public-web-perf@w3.org>
Yes I agree about:blank should not be included.


On Tue, May 7, 2013 at 10:25 PM, Deng, Pan <pan.deng@intel.com> wrote:

>  In latest Resource Timing draft [1], example 3 of section 4.2 says:****
>
> *“…the user agent may fetch an **about:blank** resource for the **IFRAME**.
> If at a later time the **src** attribute is changed dynamically via
> script, the user agent may fetch the new URL resource for the **IFRAME**.
> In this case, both the fetch of the **about:blank** resource, as well as
> the fetch of the new URL would be included as PerformanceResourceTiming**”
> *
>
> I noticed this example doesn’t exist in CR version [2], and was added from
> June 27, 2012 draft [3], however I didn’t find a discussion about it.****
>
> ** **
>
> Why the initial “about:blank” item should be included? I can’t imagine it
> is fetched from networking layer. I think it would make more sense if it is:
> ****
>
> *“…In this case, the fetch of the new URL should be included as
> PerformanceResourceTiming**”*.****
>
> You idea? J****
>
> ** **
>
> [1]
> https://dvcs.w3.org/hg/webperf/raw-file/tip/specs/ResourceTiming/Overview.html
> ****
>
> [2] http://www.w3.org/TR/resource-timing/ ****
>
> [3]
> http://dvcs.w3.org/hg/webperf/raw-file/9f30b23d0d99/specs/ResourceTiming/Overview.html
> ****
>
> ** **
>
> thanks****
>
> Pan****
>
> ** **
>
Received on Wednesday, 8 May 2013 12:58:36 UTC

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