- From: Jonas Sicking <jonas@sicking.cc>
- Date: Mon, 13 Oct 2014 13:49:13 -0700
- To: Nic Jansma <nic@nicj.net>
- Cc: Eli Perelman <eperelman@mozilla.com>, Yoav Weiss <yoav@yoav.ws>, public-web-perf <public-web-perf@w3.org>, Ehsan Akhgari <ehsan.akhgari@gmail.com>
On Mon, Oct 13, 2014 at 11:24 AM, Nic Jansma <nic@nicj.net> wrote: > Hi Eli! > > In hindsight, I would agree with both of your recommendations. > > At this point though, with UserTiming being a W3C Recommendation, I think > that changing the names would bring confusion. They're also only seen by > developers. > > If there are any additional "standard" marks you can think of that would be > useful, please let us know as well. Hi Nic, It somewhat concerns me that we say "use whatever name mark you want, it's just a string for you to give your own meaning to", but that we then turn around and say "except for these names, these have special behavior. Don't use these unless you mean exactly what we define them to mean". This is something that we've stayed away from with for example Element class names or id values. Various proposals have been made which gave special meanings to class names or id values, but they have always been shot down because things are just simpler if those are namespaces owned entirely by authors. Has any browsers actually implemented any browser features using the defined mark names? / Jonas
Received on Monday, 13 October 2014 20:50:10 UTC