- From: Olli Pettay <Olli.Pettay@helsinki.fi>
- Date: Wed, 23 Mar 2011 17:47:18 +0200
- To: Zhiheng Wang <zhihengw@google.com>
- CC: Tony Gentilcore <tonyg@google.com>, public-web-perf@w3.org, Nic Jansma <njansma@microsoft.com>
On 03/23/2011 08:39 AM, Zhiheng Wang wrote: > Instead of enumerating/predicting all the possible navigation > types, TYPE_RESERVED > is meant to be a catch-all type (to replace TYPE_OTHERS in the original > draft) while we > outline some of the common ones that are likely to be used in latency > analysis. Some > consistency is lost between edits. > > I agree that we need to be more specific about the reloading cases > It is equally important to be more specific with script initiated loading. Currently all the tests assume that script initiated loads cause TYPE_NAVIGATE, but per the draft the type should be TYPE_RESERVED. -Olli
Received on Wednesday, 23 March 2011 15:47:53 UTC