Re: adding video and audio performance in charter

On Wed, 2010-07-07 at 14:58 -0700, Zhiheng Wang wrote:

>     To make sure I understand, are you proposing adding Audio/Video
> performance
> studies to the WebPerf WG or the WebTiming draft? Adding it to WebPerf
> (as a separated
> deliverable) makes perfect sense to me. 

The former.

>    Depending on Mike's studies, audio/video performance benchmarking
> can get wild and
> beyond the scope of timing, so I am not sure if we want to attach it
> to WebTiming. Doing
> that will likely delay the standardization of the the draft as well.
> 
> 
>    Out of curiosity, any pointer to Mike's study?

Mike didn't do any study.

I removed the adding wording for now. After since its timing information
related to navigation and elements, I would argue that working on the
performance of audio and video elements is in scope, even for WebTiming.
Whether the group decides to do this in WebTiming v1, v2, or a separate
draft is up to them. It seems appropriate not to do this for v1 imho
since it's unexplored territories and it would delay the other
functionalities.

Philippe

Received on Friday, 9 July 2010 14:45:19 UTC