- From: David A. Lee <dlee@calldei.com>
- Date: Fri, 5 Dec 2008 14:32:44 -0500
- To: "Norman Walsh" <ndw@nwalsh.com>, "XProc Dev" <xproc-dev@w3.org>
On that mindset ... I agree 100% >From a standards perspective maybe performance should be left out completely and left up to the vendors to publish themselves. There is too much "gray area" in performance results that unless you spec out extremely well exactly what it all means, not only may it discourage publication, but could easily be abused either intentionally or unintentionally. Compliance with specs via comparison of input/vs output is fairly objective (although some things are hard like validating that a remote push/write request actually happened) but validating performance results is neigh impossible. I agree this should be outside the scope of the specs and W3C ... ( Unless someone wants to write a NEW spec on how to actually perform benchmarks and validate them !) ------------ quoteth "David A. Lee" <dlee@calldei.com> writes: > Alternatively ... maybe this is more valuable as a seperate report > entirely with performance benchmarks as the goal not spec compliance. I think that would be better as a separate report. With my chair's hat on, I don't want to ask implementors to report performance numbers because I fear it will make implementors reluctant to submit their results. But I don't mind setting up a second report when I've got the time. And some more appopriate tests.
Received on Friday, 5 December 2008 19:33:28 UTC