Re: [w3ctag/design-reviews] Soft Navigations (Issue #879)

Hi @yoavweiss,

Thank you for clarifying. We took another look today.
Switching from DOM manipulation to paint-based heuristics generally seems like the right direction, but we had trouble understanding the specifics from the Paint Timing spec. It seems to provide a definition for what a [contentful, paintable element](https://www.w3.org/TR/paint-timing/#contentful) is, what the [first contentful paint]() is, and which CSS images are [contentful](https://www.w3.org/TR/paint-timing/#contentful-image), but we're not quite sure how a contentful paint is defined and how this heuristic avoids false positives (e.g. hover effects that change a CSS background being counted as soft navigations). 
 
Also, as a general principle, when introducing heuristics, it's generally [good to also introduce a way to override the heuristic](https://github.com/w3ctag/design-principles/issues/455). If that's too hard, then the data collected by the heuristic should be treated as potentially noisy, i.e. this concept of Soft navigations should not be relied upon for anything that affects the user experience. For analytics, it may be ok; probably better to err on the side of false positives than false negatives, and include enough data that the false positives could be filtered out on the analytics side.

-- 
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
https://github.com/w3ctag/design-reviews/issues/879#issuecomment-1828401200
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.

Message ID: <w3ctag/design-reviews/issues/879/1828401200@github.com>