- From: Steve Lacey <sjl@chromium.org>
- Date: Thu, 5 May 2011 10:04:50 -0700
On Thu, May 5, 2011 at 2:54 AM, Jeroen Wijering <jeroen at longtailvideo.com>wrote: > Hey Steve, > > This looks great; would be a really useful set of data for video players / > publishers. Since none of the metrics have a time component, developers can > sample the data over the window / at the frequency they prefer. > > Would jitter be calculated over decodedFrames or > decodedFrames+droppedFrames? In the first case, jitter is a more granular > metric for measuring exact presentation performance. In the latter case, > jitter can serve as a single metric for tracking processing power (simple!). > In either case, it's fairly straightforward to calculate towards the other > metric. > Actually, I would expect presentedFrames + droppedFrames would be used. This implies all decoded frames that were supposed to be presented. > > Resetting the values when @src changes is a good idea. Changing @src is > much used for advertising and playlist support (it works around iOS not > supporting the play() call). > > Kind regards, > > Jeroen Wijering > > > > On May 3, 2011, at 12:15 AM, Steve Lacey wrote: > > > All, > > > > I've updated the wiki with a proposal... > > > > http://wiki.whatwg.org/wiki/Video_Metrics#Proposal > > > > Cheers! > > Steve > > > > On Sat, Apr 9, 2011 at 7:08 AM, Silvia Pfeiffer < > silviapfeiffer1 at gmail.com> wrote: > > Ah, thanks for the link. I've included Silverlight stats, too, for > > completeness. If somebody knows about QuickTime stats, that would be > > another good one to add, I guess. > > > > Cheers, > > Silvia. > > > > On Fri, Apr 8, 2011 at 5:21 PM, Jeroen Wijering > > <jeroen at longtailvideo.com> wrote: > > > > > > On Apr 7, 2011, at 8:11 AM, Silvia Pfeiffer wrote: > > > > > >> I've also just added a section with the stats that the Adobe Flash > > >> player exposes. > > > > > > Great. Perhaps Silverlight stats might be of use too - though they're > fairly similar: > > > > > > > http://learn.iis.net/page.aspx/582/advanced-logging-for-iis-70---client-logging/ > > > > > >> Apart from the statistics that are not currently available from the > > >> HTML5 player, there are stats that are already available, such as > > >> currentSrc, currentTime, and all the events which can be turned into > > >> hooks for measurement. > > > > > > Yes, the network and ready states are very useful to determine if > clients are stalling for buffering etc. > > > > > >> I think the page now has a lot of analysis of currently used stats - > > >> probably a sufficient amount. All the video publishing sites likely > > >> just use a subpart of the ones that Adobe Flash exposes in their > > >> analytics. > > > > > > Especially all the separate A/V bytecounts are overkill IMO. > > > > > > One useful metric I didn't list for JW Player but is very nice is > Flash's "isLive" property. > > > > > > Kind regards, > > > > > > Jeroen > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >> On Thu, Apr 7, 2011 at 4:52 AM, Mark Watson <watsonm at netflix.com> > wrote: > > >>> All, > > >>> > > >>> I added some material to the wiki page based on our experience here > at Netflix and based on the metrics defined in MPEG DASH for adaptive > streaming. I'd love to here what people think. > > >>> > > >>> Statistics about presentation/rendering seem to be covered, but what > should also be considered are network performance statistics, which become > increasingly difficult to collect from the server when sessions are making > use of multiple servers, possibly across multiple CDNs. > > >>> > > >>> Another aspect important for performance management is error > reporting. Some thoughts on that on the page. > > >>> > > >>> ...Mark > > >>> > > >>> On Mar 31, 2011, at 7:07 PM, Robert O'Callahan wrote: > > >>> > > >>>> On Fri, Apr 1, 2011 at 1:33 PM, Chris Pearce <chris at pearce.org.nz> > wrote: > > >>>> > > >>>>> On 1/04/2011 12:22 p.m., Steve Lacey wrote: > > >>>>> > > >>>>>> Chris - in the mozilla stats, I agree on the need for a frame > count of > > >>>>>> frames that actually make it the the screen, but am interested in > why we > > >>>>>> need both presented and painted? Wouldn't just a simple > 'presented' (i.e. > > >>>>>> presented to the user) suffice? > > >>>>>> > > >>>>>> > > >>>>> We distinguish between "painted" and "presented" so we have a > measure of > > >>>>> the latency in our rendering pipeline. It's more for our benefit as > browser > > >>>>> developers than for web developers. > > >>>>> > > >>>> > > >>>> Yeah, just to be clear, we don't necessarily think that everything > in our > > >>>> stats API should be standardized. We should wait and see what > authors > > >>>> actually use. > > >>>> > > >>>> Rob > > >>>> -- > > >>>> "Now the Bereans were of more noble character than the > Thessalonians, for > > >>>> they received the message with great eagerness and examined the > Scriptures > > >>>> every day to see if what Paul said was true." [Acts 17:11] > > >>>> > > >>> > > >>> > > > > > > > > > >
Received on Thursday, 5 May 2011 10:04:50 UTC