- From: Zhiheng Wang <zhihengw@google.com>
- Date: Tue, 8 Feb 2011 11:33:06 -0800
- To: Philippe Le Hegaret <plh@w3.org>
- Cc: Rotan Hanrahan <rotan.hanrahan@mobileaware.com>, public-web-perf@w3.org
Received on Tuesday, 8 February 2011 19:33:39 UTC
Yes, the current draft<https://dvcs.w3.org/hg/webperf/raw-file/tip/specs/NavigationTiming/Overview.html>has a note in the requestStart section to explain the decision of not including requestEnd. Could you please help update the published version? thanks, Zhiheng On Tue, Feb 8, 2011 at 11:24 AM, Philippe Le Hegaret <plh@w3.org> wrote: > On Tue, 2011-01-18 at 15:47 -0800, Zhiheng Wang wrote: > > Hi, Rotan, > > > > > > You have summarized it well! Most of the points you brought up > > indeed contribute to the decision of dropping requestEnd. > > And, feedback we received suggests that the cost of finding out a > > sensible requestEnd in certain browser might be high, due to > > the encapsulation. > > > > > > I will seek to give this better documentation in the draft. > > Hi Zhiheng, > > Did you make any actual change to the spec following this? > > Philippe > > > >
Received on Tuesday, 8 February 2011 19:33:39 UTC