Re: [w3ctag/design-reviews] Request to review First Paint Timing (#177)

So there's some discussion in the linked [Why First Paint as Web Perf API?](https://docs.google.com/document/d/1wdxSXo_jctZjdPaJeTtYYFF-rLtUFxrU72_7h9qbQaM/edit) document about the relative value of `first-paint` versus `first-contentful-paint`, pointing out that:
> FP should be monitored by developers as a top level Progress Metric in addition to FCP.
> FP is still necessary even if we have FCP. FP is the first major feedback to the user that “It is happening”. It indicates that the “browser has started rendering”. 
> FCP is less reliable for this first visual indication, because it can move due to adding some minor contentful but meaningless thing such as a copyright image.

This makes me wonder how useful `first-content-paint` is overall.

Was there consideration of adding an API that allows developers to request first-paint data (maybe separately for background, image, text, etc.) for a specific element that they care about the painting of, rather than the potentially-volatile `first-contentful-paint`?  (Does that make things a lot harder, or just a little harder?)

-- 
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
https://github.com/w3ctag/design-reviews/issues/177#issuecomment-309828633