- From: ??? <willchan@chromium.org>
- Date: Tue, 29 Jan 2013 15:56:16 -0800
- To: Arvind Jain <arvind@google.com>
- Cc: James Simonsen <simonjam@chromium.org>, "McCall, Mike" <mmccall@akamai.com>, "public-web-perf@w3.org" <public-web-perf@w3.org>, "Jain, Shakesh" <shjain@akamai.com>
Sorry, I'm less familiar here. Can someone clarify which server knows what? On Tue, Jan 29, 2013 at 3:32 PM, Arvind Jain <arvind@google.com> wrote: > I agree with James. There's the case where RUM collection is done by a third > party but even there, this info could be collected outside of the resource > timing API. > > > > On Tue, Jan 29, 2013 at 2:52 PM, James Simonsen <simonjam@chromium.org> > wrote: >> >> I can't speak for everyone, but my opinion is that Resource Timing should >> not repeat information that the server already knows. You should be able to >> record the protocol on the server side. >> >> James >> >> >> On Mon, Jan 28, 2013 at 7:09 AM, McCall, Mike <mmccall@akamai.com> wrote: >>> >>> After some internal discussions, a colleague recently started a >>> thread[1] on the spdy-dev mailing list, asking about having an interface >>> for developers to leverage to determine whether or not a web page >>> resource >>> was fetched via SPDY (or in the future, HTTP 2.0). >>> >>> Since the Resource Timing specification already enumerates the resources >>> for a >>> given page, it seems like it would make sense to also include which >>> protocol was used to fetch a given resource. >>> >>> What does the group think? >>> >>> Thanks, >>> >>> Mike >>> >>> 1. >>> https://groups.google.com/forum/?fromgroups=#!topic/spdy-dev/ERaEDaTnt7w >>> >>> >> >
Received on Wednesday, 30 January 2013 10:53:52 UTC