- From: Sigbjørn Vik <sigbjorn@opera.com>
- Date: Thu, 10 Nov 2011 16:22:38 +0100
- To: public-web-perf@w3.org
Some questions about missing definitions of exceptions, all other comments are about the language used. Method exceptions ================= clearResourceTimings - no exceptions if called with arguments? setResourceTimingBufferSize - no exceptions if called with no arguments, a double or a string? Does this mean we are missing test cases for this as well? Calling setResourceTimingBufferSize with a variable that with some goodwill can be parsed as an integer is an area ripe for incompatibilities unless specified. We really need both TCs and a specification on this before moving further. Typos ===== If a XMLHttpRequest is -> an If a HTML x2 -> an "Once Window object of the current" - missing article, add "the" Company name uses a different layout than the Navigation Timing spec (either of the two specs may be changed) Acknowledgments and References are in opposite order in the two specs (either of the two specs may be changed) Vendor specific extensions ========================== Why is it that "Vendor-specific proprietary user agent extensions to this specification are strongly discouraged.", while for Navigation timing it is only "Vendor-specific proprietary user agent extensions are discouraged." Shouldn't that language be identical? The same really goes for the bullet points below, they should have the same layout and capitalization. The measurement requirement for the two timing attributes in the two specs is also different. Processing model ================ Graph: Lots of underlines missing Processing model, step 7, 11, 12 and 13; "abort the remaining steps" is probably better than "abort the following steps". Step 22 is technically superfluous. -- Sigbjørn Vik Core Quality Services Opera Software
Received on Thursday, 10 November 2011 15:23:01 UTC