Re: [minutes] Web Performance WG Teleconference #123 2014-03-05

On Mar 7, 2014, at 12:09 PM, Philippe Le Hegaret <> wrote:

> On Fri, 2014-03-07 at 11:38 -0500, David Newton wrote:
>> On Mar 5, 2014, at 4:06 PM, Tobin Titus <> wrote:
>>> plh: Didn't we agree to drop postpone and go after lazyload.
>>> ... I think that was what we discussed at TPAC
>>> JatinderMann: I think you're right. We should review TPAC notes to
>>> verify.
>>> ... I think we said we should drop postpone for now and kill the CSS
>>> property.
>>> plh: We should update the action item title to match
>>> JatinderMann: We should open an action item to remove postpone from
>>> resource priorities.
>>> ... That brings us up to date on TPAC. Will likely want to open more
>>> action items.
>>> <plh>
>>> <plh> close issue-8
>>> <trackbot> Closed issue-8.
>>> JatinderMann: We can likely close Issue-8
>> Are the TPAC notes available somewhere? Iím surprised by the decision
>> to remove `postpone` and would love to review the discussion.
> See
> In particular,
> Philippe

Thank you Philippe! As far as I can tell, there was concern about a `postpone` CSS property, but no clear reason to remove the `postpone` attribute. Am I reading this wrong? Are there good reasons for dropping the attribute?

Iím coming at this from a responsive images point of view. Given a user browsing on a mobile connection with limited bandwidth, a `lazyload` attr would certainly help improve (apparent) load time, but it doesnít have the overall bandwidth-, memory-, and battery-saving benefits of `postpone`.


Received on Friday, 7 March 2014 17:24:01 UTC