- From: Ilya Grigorik <igrigorik@google.com>
- Date: Wed, 22 Oct 2014 12:24:39 -0700
- To: public-web-perf <public-web-perf@w3.org>
- Cc: Tobin Titus <tobint@microsoft.com>
- Message-ID: <CADXXVKrpJQSzSy2KwOcQR6wQ9ZoXa_w43w-G+=dF9hXWG2JVmw@mail.gmail.com>
Draft spec update: https://github.com/w3c/navigation-timing/pull/5 -
thoughts, comments?
ig
On Wed, Oct 15, 2014 at 7:35 PM, Ilya Grigorik <igrigorik@google.com> wrote:
> Based on the feedback from the conference call, current proposal is as
> follows:
>
> ------(discussion @
> https://github.com/w3c/navigation-timing/issues/3)------
>
> Transfer size (transferSize): this attribute must return the size, in
> octets received by the client, consumed by the response header fields and
> the response message body [1]. This SHOULD include HTTP overhead (such as
> HTTP/1.1 chunked encoding and whitespace around header fields, including
> newlines, and HTTP/2 frame overhead, along with other server-to-client
> frames on the same stream), but SHOULD NOT include lower-layer protocol
> overhead (such as TLS or TCP).
>
> Decoded size (decodedSize): this attribute must return the size, in
> octets, of the message body used, after removing any applied
> content-codings [2].
>
> ------
>
> [1] http://httpwg.github.io/specs/rfc7230.html#message.body
> [2] http://httpwg.github.io/specs/rfc7231.html#data.encoding
>
> For examples of 200/304/cache fetches and reported values, see bottom of:
> https://github.com/w3c/navigation-timing/issues/3#issue-45803731
>
> Anne+Boris raised some good questions on the GitHub thread, and we're
> still working through those.
>
> *Tobin: *could you also run this one by the IE networking team?
>
> ig
>
> On Wed, Oct 15, 2014 at 7:08 PM, Ilya Grigorik <igrigorik@google.com>
> wrote:
>
>> On Wed, Oct 15, 2014 at 12:46 PM, <bizzbyster@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>> - I don't believe we need to expose HTTP response codes; they're
>>> unnecessary.
>>>
>>> Is there some reason not to expose the HTTP response codes?
>>>
>>
>> The issue we're discussing here is how and whether to expose transfer and
>> decoded sizes, HTTP response codes are orthogonal and should be moved into
>> a separate discussion. I'd like to keep this thread focused so we can make
>> progress on {transfer, decode}Sizes.
>>
>> ig
>>
>>
>>
>
Received on Wednesday, 22 October 2014 19:25:47 UTC