- From: Xiaoqian Wu <xiaoqian@w3.org>
- Date: Thu, 27 Jul 2017 02:27:48 +0800
- To: public-web-perf <public-web-perf@w3.org>
The minutes of today's call are available at: https://www.w3.org/2017/07/26-webperf-minutes.html The next meeting is on 16 August. See also: Web Performance Working Group 26 Jul 2017 See also: IRC log Attendees Present igrigorik, shubhie, Nic, todd, xiaoqian, nolanlawson Regrets Chair igrigorik Scribe nolanlawson Contents Topics Spec Audit Improve Links of the WebPerf Specs PageVisibility #29 Summary of Action Items Summary of Resolutions Spec Audit <igrigorik> spec audit: https://docs.google.com/document/d/106fu-2acn7JexSadxyKrxQny78WROk6u-Vwlte2zpgg/edit okay taking notes now, please correct me if I goof something ilya: rIC is ready to go to CR ... blocking issue with Beacon is tests toddreif: we're trying to focus on finishing the PR ... we have to delete worker tests because that was removed from the spec. tests need minor cleanup ilya: for HR-time need tests for time-origin toddreif: should be done by EOW ilya: should we merge time-origin into L2? it's in firefox and soon in chrome toddreif: it's in Edge insider too ... we'll see if we can take on tests ilya: ok so it'll go in L2 ... need to revisit performance timeline before tpac toddreif: should we go back to working draft? ilya: we need to manually push a CR update every time ... we'll go back to working draft and revisit after TPAC ... landed tests for page visibility. missing is onvisibilitychange handler. safari supports, firefox implementing. merge into L2? preload: many shipping impl's. let's push for CR by TPAC. problem is unspecced cache behavior (ilya^) ilya: long tasks has editorial issues. is v2 L1? shubhie: haven't done any work on v2 yet, maybe not worth blocking toddreif: we'd prefer to skip v1 and ship v2 shubhie: firefox is actively looking at it toddreif: maybe good to get an editorial draft. can't get to CR without 2 impls ... let's get v1 in editorial draft, then put likely v2 chrome stuff into that v1, then drive consensus ilya: whatever firefox chooses from v1/v2 may become the L1 ... let's tackle editorial issues then watch firefox/edge progress. keep as working draft ... user timing missing worker tests toddreif: we'll push on that ilya: server timing making progress, still in draft Improve Links of the WebPerf Specs toddreif: we need to ensure good links in the specs ilya: marcos suggested better format than markdown. we have lots of small specs that are tightly coupled, links are hard to maintain. combine specs? toddreif: performance timeline could theoretically be one spec. problem is keeping things well-defined ilya: hr time and timeline are tightly coupled. hr time was for perf.now() toddreif: different UAs still ship different specs in different rhythms. html5 is a mega-spec though ... let's get consistent first and see if separate specs can work ... can't have broken links nic: people reference subsections and then sometimes those get renamed xiaoqian: one approach is to update upstream spec. or file issue on other spec ilya: respec vs bikeshed: what is the good pattern xiaoqian: error reporting in other spec may help ilya: knowing all upstream links is a hard problem xiaoqian: one big spec doesn't help, most broken links are in html5 spec ilya: marcos says respec has ability to pull in reference. can flag issues for unknown reference xiaoqian: respec always keeps link to latest PageVisibility #29 ilya: pagevisibility issue 29, can we log if page was ever visible <igrigorik> https://github.com/w3c/page-visibility/issues/29 shubhie: devs need insight into visibility status early on, especially given background throttling. need to know before script registered ilya: things like ctrl-click skew telemetry due to throttling shubhie: devs want to know if page was loaded in background or foreground and whether it was ever visible/hidden ilya: implicit here is that background === throttling. should we expose throttling itself? shubhie: different thing, devs want to know if users got bored and tabbed away nic: telemetry-wise both are useful ilya: we had prerender switch, prerender-to-visible. nobody implemented. could log visibility event to cover tabbing in and out nic: we do that as soon as we're on the page shubhie: seems a common problem, need analytics before script can load ilya: came up at f2f, issue is analytics can load at any point. onload is well defined point. every entry type can define its own buffer nic: ryosuke pushed back, said max would always be full ilya: can be worked around via loader snippets ... does surfacing new entries for page visibility make sense for L2? toddreif: folks I've talked to just want a boolean to say if it was ever non-visible ... goal is to separate pristine foreground pages nic: I think we want "was ever visible" too shubhie: that was the original bug ilya: at which point does this get flipped toddreif: for same tab, when the document is created ... visible/hidden are separate from painted/not painted ilya: facebook wants to know if pages loaded slowly because user switched away and page was throttled. boolean wouldn't address that problem toddreif: pages users never touched, they want a bucket for that shubhie: let's ask if two bits - ever hidden, ever visible - and see if that solves the issue ilya: let's look at high resolution time as primitive PR from tim On 2017-07-26 05:55, Ilya Grigorik wrote: > Hangout: > https://hangouts.google.com/hangouts/_/chromium.org/webperf-wg [1] > > WIP > agenda:https://docs.google.com/document/d/10dz_7QM5XCNsGeI63R864lF9gFqlqQD37B4q8Q46LMM/edit#heading=h.3jqbnbj5d2i > [2] > > If you have other topics you'd like to discuss, please leave a comment > on the agenda—the doc is open to everyone. > > Links: > ------ > [1] https://hangouts.google.com/hangouts/_/chromium.org/webperf-wg > [2] > https://docs.google.com/document/d/10dz_7QM5XCNsGeI63R864lF9gFqlqQD37B4q8Q46LMM/edit#heading=h.3jqbnbj5d2i
Received on Wednesday, 26 July 2017 18:27:52 UTC