- 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