- From: Jonas Sicking <jonas@sicking.cc>
- Date: Fri, 29 Jan 2010 00:50:24 -0800
- To: Zhiheng Wang <zhihengw@google.com>
- Cc: public-webapps@w3.org
On Thu, Jan 28, 2010 at 10:53 PM, Zhiheng Wang <zhihengw@google.com> wrote:
>> >> Also, what is the use case for the "Ticks" interface?
>> >
>> > The Ticks interface is a convenient way to store time measurements
>> > and
>> > retrieve it later on a page.
>> > I will have some example there.
>>
>> Why not just do:
>> myTimings = {};
>> myTimings.fooStart = new Date();
>>
>> etc? Javascript has perfectly good ways to store values already.
>
> window.timing property keeps timing info of previous navigation as well
> so the Tick
> interface also provides a way to pass custom POI to the next page. Some
> security
> measure need to be added later though.
Sounds like simply using
sessionStorage.myTimings = {};
sessionStorage.myTimings.fooStart = new Date();
>> >> I would really encourage that this spec be reduced to the most
>> >> important parts first and wait for browsers to catch up before adding
>> >> "nice to have" features.
>> >
>> > Agree and we do keep that in mind. Most of the the properties
>> > specified
>> > right now are
>> > on the critical path of user perceived latency though.
>>
>> That surprises me. See my first answer above.
>
> I meant these properties are in the latency critical path of the element
> it belongs to...
>
>>
>> >> If implementations implement progress events on the various elements
>> >> it would seem like you would get most of the advantages from this
>> >> spec.
>> >
>> > The progress events are great, except that they mostly focus on
>> > downloading the content but
>> > not much about everything else, say, parseStart.
>>
>> Specs can be changed, nothing is set in stone :)
>
> Good to know. :-) Having more data exported in the progress events will
> be
> good news to those performance debugging tools. When collecting latency
> field data, many developers perfer to fetch all timing info of an
> element (window.document?)
> at once and send a json object.
> thanks,
> Zhiheng
While I agree that timing information is important, I don't think it's
going to be so commonly used that we need to add convenience features
for it. Adding a few event listeners at the top of the document does
not seem like a big burden.
/ Jonas
Received on Friday, 29 January 2010 08:58:37 UTC