- From: Philippe Le Hegaret <plh@w3.org>
- Date: Tue, 28 Apr 2015 16:54:56 -0400
- To: public-web-perf <public-web-perf@w3.org>
Available at
https://www.w3.org/2015/04/22-webperf-minutes.html
Web Performance Working Group Teleconference
22 Apr 2015
See also: [2]IRC log
[2] http://www.w3.org/2015/04/22-webperf-irc
Attendees
Present
+33.1.56.69.aaaa, yoav, Plh, +657888aabb, ilya, marcos,
[Microsoft], +1.310.310.aacc, Michael
Regrets
Chair
SV_MEETING_CHAIR
Scribe
plh
Contents
* [3]Topics
1. [4]Web Performance Group charter
2. [5]new draft for Performance Observer
* [6]Summary of Action Items
__________________________________________________________
<trackbot> Date: 22 April 2015
[7]http://www.w3.org/TR/2015/WD-navigation-timing-2-20150422/
[7] http://www.w3.org/TR/2015/WD-navigation-timing-2-20150422/
Web Performance Group charter
Todd: talked to Adrian before this call. as long as the charter
covers the scope, without broadening it too much.
... as long as we have general deliverables, we should be fine
... CPU and memory is an example
... "solve the pb of understanding CPU and memory on the web
page"
[8]https://github.com/w3c/charter-webperf/pull/4
[8] https://github.com/w3c/charter-webperf/pull/4
<igrigorik>
[9]https://rawgit.com/toddreifsteck/charter-webperf/2015draft/i
ndex.html
[9] https://rawgit.com/toddreifsteck/charter-webperf/2015draft/index.html
Todd: TODO: add remaining information, sort by priority.
[10]https://docs.google.com/document/d/1oCfLli-Llm1GjiGcoXprY1e
LwK-C6OPRH2XP8zHrtlg/edit#
[10] https://docs.google.com/document/d/1oCfLli-Llm1GjiGcoXprY1eLwK-C6OPRH2XP8zHrtlg/edit
Ilya: on deliverables: Performance Observer is part of
Timeline. no need to call it out
"The working group will deliver updated versions of the
following:"
Timing control for script-based animations
An interoperable and efficient means for web page authors to
write script-based animations where the user agent is in
control of limiting the update rate of the animation.
]]
[11]https://html.spec.whatwg.org/multipage/browsers.html#the-wi
ndow-object
[11] https://html.spec.whatwg.org/multipage/browsers.html#the-window-object
[12]http://www.w3.org/TR/html51/browsers.html#the-window-object
[12] http://www.w3.org/TR/html51/browsers.html#the-window-object
Ilya: should we remove requestAnimationFrame from our list?
... let's have it as an open issue for now
... should we move that spec in a separate section, moving into
the html spec, but we need to make sure it's done correctly
Todd: it may not make sense to give up stewardship
... so I'd keep in the charter
Ilya: ok, let's keep it in the charter and resolve the
differences between the specs
Marcos: do we know why it's in the html spec?
Plh: I propose that we keep it separate for now. it doesn't
look like the definition in html spec is complete. we'll need
to talk to them
Ilya: Server Timing is missing
... add CPU and memory
... [13]https://github.com/w3c/charter-webperf/pull/1
[13] https://github.com/w3c/charter-webperf/pull/1
Yoav: not sure if it belongs to us or houdini
Ilya: visibility seems more like houdini but they're not aware
of the problems
Yoav: should we do use cases then?
Todd: seems appropriate
Ilya: can we make it a goal for the group to draft use cases?
Plh: sounds good
Todd: ok
Ilya: emphasizing working with other groups
Plh: we should make sure we get reviews from webapps, tag, and
webappsec
... in the deliverables section
<ToddReifsteck> FYI, here is an example of how CSS lists
Deliverables: [14]http://www.w3.org/2010/09/CSSWG/charter
[14] http://www.w3.org/2010/09/CSSWG/charter
Marcos: charters looks ok to me otherwise
[15]http://www.w3.org/wiki/Web_Performance/Publications
[15] http://www.w3.org/wiki/Web_Performance/Publications
Todd: I'll put a pointer to the dashboard then
Ilya: setImmediate?
Todd: I'll have data in 3 weeks
[16]http://www.w3.org/Consortium/Legal/2015/copyright-software-
and-document.html
[16] http://www.w3.org/Consortium/Legal/2015/copyright-software-and-document.html
Todd: it's more likely we get our charter more quickly
... without the new license
new draft for Performance Observer
Ilya: please have a look at the PR
[17]https://github.com/w3c/performance-timeline/pull/10
[17] https://github.com/w3c/performance-timeline/pull/10
Todd: we added various fields to navigation timing but didn't
implement them
... should we keep them?
Ilya: for chrome, we are looking for a bunch of them, like
workerStart
... it's a question of when
... some of the feedbacks is that it's not easy to find what's
new
Todd: linkNegotiation, sizes, type, workerStart
Plh: they're listed in the status but I guess folks don't look
at it
Ilya: we'll have to do some refactoring
<marcosc__> Bugzilla bug:
[18]https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1043083
[18] https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1043083
Ilya: and be more precise on what has been implemented and
where
Marcos: would be good to link to browser bugs
<marcosc__> [19]https://w3c.github.io/manifest/
[19] https://w3c.github.io/manifest/
Implementation status:
Gecko
Blink
]]
Tood: seems a good solution for us
<yoav> Sorry folks, but I gotta go. Another meeting coming
up...
Plh: I wanted to adopt CSS conventions for our draft, eg
performance-timeline, performance-timeline-2,
performance-timeline-2,
Summary of Action Items
[End of minutes]
Received on Tuesday, 28 April 2015 20:55:00 UTC