- From: Christian Biesinger <cbiesinger@gmail.com>
- Date: Mon, 15 Aug 2011 16:57:06 -0700
- To: Jatinder Mann <jmann@microsoft.com>
- Cc: James Simonsen <simonjam@chromium.org>, public-web-perf <public-web-perf@w3.org>
I think that would be good. When I was thinking about the Firefox implementation, I was already assuming that the resource timings would use the same clock as the root. -christian On Mon, Aug 15, 2011 at 4:52 PM, Jatinder Mann <jmann@microsoft.com> wrote: > The first sentence looks like a copy and paste issue from the Navigation > Timing spec. It should be: “timing attributes are not skewed by adjustments > to the system clock while fetching the resource.” I will update the spec. > > > > Good point. If you want to create a timeline of the entire page, requiring > iframes resources to have the same monotonic clock as the root navigation > would be best. I can update the spec to be clear on this point also. > > > > Thanks, > > Jatinder > > > > From: public-web-perf-request@w3.org [mailto:public-web-perf-request@w3.org] > On Behalf Of James Simonsen > Sent: Monday, August 15, 2011 3:35 PM > To: public-web-perf > Subject: [Resource Timing] Monotonic Clock > > > > I was reading through the Resource Timing spec again looking at the > monotonic clock requirements. I had a couple of comments on it. > > > > First, it says that "timing attributes are not skewed by adjustments to the > system clock during the navigation." We might not be navigating when > resources load, but they should still use a monotonic clock referenced from > the initial page load so that we can construct an accurate timeline. > > > > Also, what do we do about resources that load from iframes? Are they > referenced from the iframe's navigation or from the root navigation? The > latter seems most useful from my perspective, but maybe there are other > concerns there. > > > > James
Received on Monday, 15 August 2011 23:57:43 UTC