- From: Jatinder Mann <jmann@microsoft.com>
- Date: Wed, 7 Mar 2012 19:35:28 +0000
- To: Sigbjørn Vik <sigbjorn@opera.com>, "public-web-perf@w3.org" <public-web-perf@w3.org>
>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) All typos fixed. >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. The vendor prefix sections now have similar text. >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. Zhiheng will update the diagram. The processing model changes have been made. Thanks, Jatinder
Received on Wednesday, 7 March 2012 19:36:17 UTC