On Wed, Aug 24, 2011 at 2:41 PM, Jatinder Mann <jmann@microsoft.com> wrote: > Based on the thread comments, our decision to use a monotonic clock was > partly driven by not wanting the timestamps to be compared with Date.now(), > which is subject to system clock changes, so my originally concern here is > not an issue. **** > > ** ** > > Per the WG discussion today, we are proposing that all timing attributes > returned from the new getEntries() methods be defined in sub-millisecond > resolution in terms of a monotonic clock measuring time elapsed from the > beginning of the navigation of the root document (navigationStart). In order > to preserve compatibility of performance.timing (Navigation Timing), getting > timing attributes directly from performance.timing will continue to return > millisecond resolution from the Unix epoch. Does anyone see a concern with > this approach?**** > > ** ** > > Likewise, would requestAnimationFrame timestamp also use this new timebase? > I think that we want to do this as well - I was going to send out a proposal for exactly this once we reached consensus on this thread (which it seems like we have). Excellent! - James > ** > > Jatinder**** > > ** ** >Received on Wednesday, 24 August 2011 21:48:23 UTC
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 18:01:09 UTC