Re: HAR vs Nav timings

Can I just offer my opinion here, since I won't be able to join the
conference call:

We should strive to provide all the data that is needed for HAR, but
requiring this in the spec would not be a good idea IMO. It is easy to
provide this feature in a library, and putting it in the spec will
mean that this will take a while to be available, and that this format
will forever have to be part of the API. Should this format ever
change, or be replaced by a new format, it will be difficult or
impossible to replace the exposed format with the new one.

Therefore I would prefer not adding this to the spec and instead using
JS libraries for this purpose.

-christian

On Tue, Nov 29, 2011 at 10:49 AM, Arvind Jain <arvind@google.com> wrote:
> Let's discuss this next week when Jan and Steve will join the call.
>
> On Mon, Nov 28, 2011 at 3:13 PM, Arvind Jain <arvind@google.com> wrote:
>> We'll discuss this in our next telecon.
>>
>> Arvind
>>
>> On Sat, Nov 26, 2011 at 9:44 PM, Steve Souders <souders@google.com> wrote:
>>> This would be a nice addition to the Web Timing specs (nav & resource).
>>> Resource timing info is necessary to output a worthwhile HAR file.
>>>
>>> -Steve
>>>
>>>
>>> On Thu, Nov 24, 2011 at 8:54 AM, Arvind Jain <arvind@google.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> We have not communicated with them. Adding Steve and Jan for their
>>>> comments.
>>>>
>>>> Arvind
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Wed, Nov 23, 2011 at 9:50 PM, Ricardo Oliveira <rvelosoo@gmail.com>
>>>> wrote:
>>>> > Hi,
>>>> >
>>>> > Just wondering if there has been any communication between the w3c nav
>>>> > timings folks and the HAR spec folks?
>>>> > http://www.softwareishard.com/blog/har-12-spec/
>>>> >
>>>> > it seems every browser has its own way of exporting an HAR file, often
>>>> > requiring add-ons, would be nice to :
>>>> >
>>>> > + have a js native call that would return an har formatted doc
>>>> > + standardize the HAR output among different browsers
>>>> >
>>>> > Cheers,
>>>> >
>>>> > --Ricardo
>>>> >
>>>> > ThousandEyes.com
>>>
>>>
>
>

Received on Tuesday, 29 November 2011 18:54:37 UTC