Re: [whatwg/fetch] Clarify which network errors create a resource timing entry (#1215)

> While there is overlap with the Reporting API (Network Error Logging), I think there's value in keeping network-level errors, since the ergonomics and delivery are different (e.g. out-of-band reports). If we're reporting network-level errors via Reporting API, is there still concern about surfacing them through ResourceTiming as well (which is what most browsers are doing today)?
> 
> This is a lot of what the issue [w3c/resource-timing#12](https://github.com/w3c/resource-timing/issues/12) was about, getting consistency on network-level and non-200 errors among the browsers.
> 
> I just did a quick refresh to see where browsers are today, and except for Safari, network-level errors are reported everywhere else:
> 
> [w3c/resource-timing#12 (comment)](https://github.com/w3c/resource-timing/issues/12#issuecomment-840316432)
> 
> What we have today is aligned closer with @annevk 's Option 1, "_... to act as if they are cross-origin and lack TAO_". The entries exist (except in Safari), but have all breakdown timestamps zero'd. Just fetchStart/responseEnd/duration are set.

I also find that option the most sensible.

-- 
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
https://github.com/whatwg/fetch/issues/1215#issuecomment-843370123