[Web Timing] Getting root timings to recommendation

Chrome 7 and the IE9 beta are drawing near. While aggressive, it might be
possible to push to get the Web Timing spec [1] into a recommended state by
then so that we can drop the vendor prefixes for those releases.

I've surveyed the spec and the two implementations and prepared a summary
[2] of the remaining differences. The left most column lists an event or
step in the whatwg HTML5 spec. The next four columns list how the two spec
sections and two implementations label that step. My editorials are on the
right summarizing the differences.

Some high level thoughts:
1. The spec has normative requirements in both 4.2 and 4.4. This introduces
the possibility that the spec is internally inconsistent (or at best
redundant). My preference would be for 4.4 to be normative and 4.2 to be
rephrased as non-normative notes.
2. The spec could use a careful editorial pass to clean up typos, apply some
formatting to 4.4, and link up more definitions.
3. Resource timing needs to be split into another document.
4. In terms of the actual implementations, there are only very minor
differences. I think this is all:
  1. We are pretty close on navigationStart, but we need to be specific
about beforeunload.
  2. [un]loadEvent[Start,End] vs. [un]load[Start,End].
  3. requestEnd is marked differently.
  4. dom*, firstPaint, fullyLoaded timings should either be put in the spec
or prefixed w/ ms.

All of this only pertains to window.performance.timing. We probably need to
talk about navigation, timingMeasures, and the new Mark/Measure APIs.


[1] http://dev.w3.org/2006/webapi/WebTiming/

Received on Monday, 16 August 2010 18:09:55 UTC