- 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