W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-web-perf@w3.org > January 2015

[minutes] 2014-12-10 Web Performance: Frame Timing, Performance Observer, Server Timing, Resources Hints/Preload, ...

From: Philippe Le Hegaret <plh@w3.org>
Date: Wed, 14 Jan 2015 15:51:54 -0500
Message-ID: <1421268714.6465.11.camel@chacal>
To: public-web-perf <public-web-perf@w3.org>

              Web Performance Working Group Teleconference

10 Dec 2014

   [2]Agenda

      [2]
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-web-perf/2014Dec/0026.html

   See also: [3]IRC log

      [3] http://www.w3.org/2014/12/10-webperf-irc

Attendees

   Present
          Plh, igrigorik, [IPcaller], Bernhard, Michael

   Regrets
   Chair
          plh

   Scribe
          plh

Contents

     * [4]Topics
         1. [5]Frame Timing
         2. [6]Performance Observer feedback
         3. [7]Server Timing feedback
         4. [8]Splitting Resource Hints / Preload
         5. [9]NT and getEntriesByType
         6. [10]Resource Timing
         7. [11]Page Visibility 2
         8. [12]next meeting
     * [13]Summary of Action Items
     __________________________________________________________

   <trackbot> Date: 10 December 2014

Frame Timing

   plh: double cpuTime should be HRT instead

   Michael: based on conversation, cpuTime will be the whole clock
   during from the start of the frame to done processing
   ... sourceFrameNumber will be the frame index

   <scribe> ACTION: Plh to update cpuTime to use HR time [recorded
   in
   [14]http://www.w3.org/2014/12/10-webperf-minutes.html#action01]

   <trackbot> Created ACTION-146 - Update cputime to use hr time
   [on Philippe Le Hégaret - due 2014-12-17].

   [15]https://github.com/w3c/frame-timing/pull/19

     [15] https://github.com/w3c/frame-timing/pull/19

   igrigorik: we need to update that one
   ... and Michael will update it

   Michael: yes, will do

   Resolution: publish the FPWD once Michael is done with the
   change

   plh: moratorium is tuesday or thursday next week

   igrigorik: we had good feedback from mozilla and ms

Performance Observer feedback

   igrigorik: maybe related to frame timing
   ... we have outstanding issues to trigger when new resources
   are added to RT
   ... the proposal is to add a subscriber
   ... but frame timing fires often
   ... proposal is to define a new "mutation" event for
   performance timeline

   plh: we should make sure anne is in the loop on this imho

   igrigorik: we probably need to formalize the use cases here

   plh: I'll follow on the list

Server Timing feedback

   igrigorik: we circulated a draft with use cases and API
   ... ideas at the moment
   ... feedback seems positive
   ... we need an official repo for it

   <scribe> ACTION: plh to make sure the repo [recorded in
   [16]http://www.w3.org/2014/12/10-webperf-minutes.html#action02]

   <trackbot> Created ACTION-147 - Make sure the repo [on Philippe
   Le Hégaret - due 2014-12-17].

   <scribe> ACTION: plh to make sure it's ok with the charter
   [recorded in
   [17]http://www.w3.org/2014/12/10-webperf-minutes.html#action03]

   <trackbot> Created ACTION-148 - Make sure it's ok with the
   charter [on Philippe Le Hégaret - due 2014-12-17].

Splitting Resource Hints / Preload

   igrigorik: confusion about mandatory hints, etc.
   ... from TPAC
   ... best way is to separate preload from the rest
   ... put the optinal semantic in a separate spec

   plh: I can do either way

   igrigorik: it's easier to implement
   ... I'll send a follow up asking for objection within a week

NT and getEntriesByType

   igrigorik: chrome and ff returns an entry array
   ... ie returns data

   plh: original thinking was to harmonize the specs and only use
   performancetimeline extension

   igrigorik: in that case, we always return an array of size 1
   ... we 'll need a test as well

   plh: I'll raise an issue to follow up

Resource Timing

   igrigorik: in the current spec, we referece RT L2
   ... that should be removed

   plh: I'd like to move the spec back to WD
   ... that should take care of the note

   igrigorik: why didn't we address audio/video in L1?

   plh: I think we weren't sure about all the use cases at that
   time

   <scribe> ACTION: plh to update RT in /TR [recorded in
   [18]http://www.w3.org/2014/12/10-webperf-minutes.html#action04]

   <trackbot> Created ACTION-149 - Update rt in /tr [on Philippe
   Le Hégaret - due 2014-12-17].

Page Visibility 2

   plh: did you reach a conclusion with the chrome team?

   igrigorik: Nat still opposes the change
   ... we'd be much better off tackling element visibility
   ... instead of hacking iframe
   ... I'll follow up on this front

next meeting

   plh: I'll ping folks to see if we need a meeting next week

Summary of Action Items

   [NEW] ACTION: plh to make sure it's ok with the charter
   [recorded in
   [19]http://www.w3.org/2014/12/10-webperf-minutes.html#action03]
   [NEW] ACTION: plh to make sure the repo [recorded in
   [20]http://www.w3.org/2014/12/10-webperf-minutes.html#action02]
   [NEW] ACTION: Plh to update cpuTime to use HR time [recorded in
   [21]http://www.w3.org/2014/12/10-webperf-minutes.html#action01]
   [NEW] ACTION: plh to update RT in /TR [recorded in
   [22]http://www.w3.org/2014/12/10-webperf-minutes.html#action04]

   [End of minutes]
Received on Wednesday, 14 January 2015 20:51:56 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Wednesday, 14 January 2015 20:51:57 UTC