Re: [NavigationTiming] new tests

On Tue, Feb 22, 2011 at 1:57 PM, Tony Gentilcore <tonyg@google.com> wrote:

>
>
> On Tue, Feb 8, 2011 at 5:31 PM, Anderson Quach <aquach@microsoft.com>wrote:
>
>> Hi Web Perf WG,
>>
>>
>>
>> I’ve added four new tests:
>>
>> http://w3c-test.org/webperf/tests/submission/Microsoft/NavigationTiming/
>>
>>
>>
>> test_navigation_type_backfoward
>>
>>
>> http://w3c-test.org/webperf/tests/submission/Microsoft/NavigationTiming/test_navigation_type_backforward.htm
>>
>
> Chrome fails this test for reasons related to the behavior of
> history.back/history.forward on subframes rather than reasons related to the
> functionality it is meant to test. I'm looking into exactly why that is and
> whether there is a way to workaround that bug so that this test can test
> what it is trying to test.
>

This is an odd problem. Replacing each test_equals() call with:
document.getElementById('log').innerHTML+=navigation_frame.performance.navigation.type;
allows the test to run properly and shows the correct navigation types at
each step. I'm still not sure what it is about the test framework that is
causing problems here.

Also, I had one more unrelated comment. I'd like to keep files like
blank_page_green.html in the /resources directory. That way each file in
webperf/tests/approved is actually a runnable test.


>
>> test_navigation_type_reload
>>
>>
>> http://w3c-test.org/webperf/tests/submission/Microsoft/NavigationTiming/test_navigation_type_reload.htm
>>
>
> LGTM
>
>
>>  test_timing_attributes_order
>>
>>
>> http://w3c-test.org/webperf/tests/submission/Microsoft/NavigationTiming/test_timing_attributes_order.htm
>>
>
> There are a couple of problems that make the test flaky:
> 1. It tests the navigation type of the main frame, so when I reload the
> page, it fails.
> 2. It assumes there was a page loaded before it, if not the unload event
> tests fail.
> Can this test be performed inside of a frame so it isn't susceptible to
> this flakiness?
>
>
>>  test_timing_client_redirect
>>
>>
>> http://w3c-test.org/webperf/tests/submission/Microsoft/NavigationTiming/test_timing_client_redirect.htm
>>
>
> LGTM, but can the meta refresh be 1 second instead of 3?
>
> This test also tests an interesting corner case (where IE9 and Chrome
> agree): After a client side redirect the navigation type is always
> "navigate," even if the page that triggered the client side redirect was
> loaded by another means. I believe this is what the spec says, but just
> wanted to call attention to it.
>
>
>>
>>
>> Best Regards,
>>
>> Anderson, Nic and Karen
>>
>> Internet Explorer
>>
>
>