Re: About window.performance namespace

   Sounds good to me. I will have these two items updated if everyone agrees
at the end of 12/17.

cheers,
Zhiheng

On Thu, Dec 16, 2010 at 2:52 PM, Anderson Quach <aquach@microsoft.com>wrote:

> Thanks Zhiheng, we want to solidify on this decision by the end of day
> Friday 12/17/2010 in order to get to Last Call for the Navigation Timing
> specification.
>
>
>
> Also, merging some thoughts on a related thread. It would be great to have
> a more specific name for handShakeStart, sslHandShakeStart is appropriate.
>
>
>
> Thanks,
>
> Anderson and Nic
>
> Internet Explorer
>
>
>
> *From:* public-web-perf-request@w3.org [mailto:
> public-web-perf-request@w3.org] *On Behalf Of *Zhiheng Wang
> *Sent:* Wednesday, December 15, 2010 9:57 PM
> *To:* public-web-perf
> *Cc:* Jonas Sicking; Sigbjørn Vik; Simon Pieters
> *Subject:* About window.performance namespace
>
>
>
> Hi, folks,
>
>
>
>    In today's conf call, the group discussed the issue of using
> window.performance namespace. The following proposal was
>
> brought up in a follow-up meeting this afternoon. It has been acknowledged
> by Anderson/Nic (IE) and Tony/James (Chrome)
>
> and we would like to hear feedback from others as well.
>
>
>
>    Proposal:
>
>      * NavigationTiming will use window.performance namespace.
>
>      * window.performance will be replaceable
>
>      * window.performance.timing and window.performance.navigation will be
> kept read-only.
>
>
>
>    Having window.performance replaceable avoid breaking existing
> javascripts. Keeping the timing and navigation objects read-only
>
> does not guarantee the integrity of timing attributes but makes forging
> these interfaces less trivial.
>
>
>
>    Please share your thoughts.
>
>
>
> cheers,
>
> Zhiheng
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>