19:31:14 <RRSAgent> RRSAgent has joined #webperf
19:31:14 <RRSAgent> logging to http://www.w3.org/2011/05/25-webperf-irc
19:31:44 <JatinderMann> rrsagent, set logs world-visible
19:32:21 <JatinderMann> scribe: JatinderMann
19:32:38 <JatinderMann> meeting: 20110518 Web Performance WG Teleconference #33
19:35:03 <JatinderMann> agenda: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-web-perf/2011May/0118.html
19:35:47 <JatinderMann> agenda+ Discuss feedback and updates to the Navigation Timing spec
19:36:00 <JatinderMann> agenda+ Discuss feedback and updates to the Resource Timing spec
19:36:04 <JatinderMann> agenda+ Discuss feedback and updates to the User Timing spec
19:36:09 <JatinderMann> agenda+ Discuss feedback and updates to the Page Visibility spec
19:36:16 <JatinderMann> agenda+ Discuss feedback and updates to the requestAnimationFrame spec
19:36:20 <JatinderMann> move to agenda 1
19:36:33 <JatinderMann> agenda+ be done
20:00:02 <Zakim> RWC_web-per(WPWG)4:00PM has now started
20:00:09 <Zakim> +[Microsoft]
20:00:41 <tonyg> tonyg has joined #webperf
20:01:12 <Zakim> + +44.207.184.aaaa
20:02:12 <Zakim> +[Google]
20:02:52 <JatinderMann> present+ ArvindJain
20:02:56 <JatinderMann> present+ NicJansma
20:03:02 <JatinderMann> present+ TonyG
20:03:08 <JatinderMann> present+ JatinderMann
20:04:03 <Zakim> + +1.650.214.aabb
20:04:21 <JatinderMann> present+ JamesS
20:04:36 <JatinderMann> present+ Anne
20:05:04 <Zakim> +nick
20:05:21 <zhiheng> zhiheng has joined #webperf
20:05:28 <JatinderMann> present+ Zhiheng
20:05:46 <satish> satish has joined #webperf
20:06:04 <JatinderMann> move to agenda 5
20:06:19 <JatinderMann> Jatinder: Zhiheng, can you summarize the update made to the Navigation Timing spec?
20:06:30 <simonjam> simonjam has joined #webperf
20:07:46 <JatinderMann> Zhiheng: When we talk about local resources, we implictly include some cases. In the original draft, requestStart includes checking http cache. We removed that. In case the http cache hit, we should include that requestStart, however, if we have a http cache miss, then it doesn't make sense.
20:09:18 <JatinderMann> Nic: That makes sense, but let us re-read this after the call.
20:09:43 <JatinderMann> Jatinder: This change should also go to the resource timing processing model?
20:09:52 <JatinderMann> Zhiheng: Yes, I will update Resource Timing also.
20:10:11 <JatinderMann> move to agenda 6
20:10:21 <JatinderMann> Topic: Resource Timing has reached FPWD as of 5/24. 
20:10:34 <Zakim> + +1.650.691.aacc
20:10:38 <JatinderMann> Jatinder: Thank you everyone for helping us to get to this point. Per feedback from last week’s call and the mailing list, many fixes went the FWPD draft. 
20:10:42 <JatinderMann> Jatinder: I have closed ACTION-30 Update the Processing Model.
20:10:49 <JatinderMann> present+ Chris
20:11:03 <jdalton> jdalton has joined #webperf
20:11:04 <JatinderMann> Topic: Initiator type updates
20:11:08 <JatinderMann> Jatinder: Tony has feedback on the definition of initiator types - http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-web-perf/2011May/0117.html
20:16:53 <JatinderMann> ACTION Jatinder to Update initiator types definitions to include elements that are included in that initiator types.
20:16:54 <trackbot> Created ACTION-32 - Update initiator types definitions to include elements that are included in that initiator types. [on Jatinder Mann - due 2011-06-01].
20:17:30 <Zakim> -nick
20:18:09 <Zakim> +nick
20:19:29 <JatinderMann> We agree to updating CSS initiator type to CSS_SUBRESOURCE.
20:20:59 <JatinderMann> We agree to combining the frame and subdocument category into subdocument.
20:21:01 <plh> plh has joined #webperf
20:21:34 <JatinderMann> present+ Philippe
20:23:20 <JatinderMann> Agree to keep XMLHTTPRequest category as is.
20:23:32 <JatinderMann> Agree to keep SVG category to include all SVG subresources.
20:23:48 <JatinderMann> Also agree to naming CSS_SUBRESOURCE as CSS, if we are doing so for SVG, for consistency.
20:27:12 <JatinderMann> Action Jatinder to update spec to include a reference to what the expected behavior with plugins
20:27:13 <trackbot> Created ACTION-33 - Update spec to include a reference to what the expected behavior with plugins [on Jatinder Mann - due 2011-06-01].
20:27:31 <JatinderMann> Topic: Security review of Resource Timing around statistical fingerprinting
20:29:14 <robreact> robreact has joined #webperf
20:30:44 <JatinderMann> Jatinder: The IE team has conducted a security review of the Resource Timing feature and we have not found any significant issues. 
20:31:30 <JatinderMann> Nic: A malicious site today can get to the same information (like is something in the cache) today using timing handles.
20:35:51 <JatinderMann> Tony: We should evaluate to see if a privacy concern really does exist before we add text that mitigates it. Rather not taint the spec with a privacy concern, if there isn't one.
20:36:53 <JatinderMann> Tony: Can Microsoft respond to the mailing list with information on their security review (e.g., found no concerns).
20:36:58 <JatinderMann> Jatinder: Yes.
20:38:12 <JatinderMann> Topic: Taking Resource Timing to Last Call
20:39:19 <JatinderMann> Jatinder: Now that we have the spec in a very stable state, I recommend we set next Wednesday (6/1/11) as our date to enter Last Call.
20:42:25 <JatinderMann> Considering we have a few actions items, let's set the Last Call date tentatively for next Wednesday. If we find that we are not targetting that date by end of this week, we can push it out.
20:43:01 <JatinderMann> move to agenda 7
20:43:09 <JatinderMann> Topic: Review Proposal to update User Timing
20:43:13 <JatinderMann> Jatinder: Nic had submitted feedback to the current proposal - http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-web-perf/2011May/0112.html
20:47:47 <Zakim> +Plh
20:50:15 <JatinderMann> Tony: I haven't had a chance to read the proposal yet. Can you summarize on the call briefly? I can look at the mail after the call.
20:51:52 <JatinderMann> Tony: I think we both agree that there should be a link between marks and measures.
20:52:15 <JatinderMann> Nic: The bigger point with the current spec was the ease of use of the apis from a web developers point of view.
20:53:08 <JatinderMann> ...In the mailing list, there are three examples given of the advantages of the current proposal: Multi-Phase scenarios, Retrieving only marks or measures, Finding the durations of a specific scenario.
20:53:55 <JatinderMann> ...Options can be to add the timestamps of the two marks to getMeasures() in the current draft or go with your proposal and allow for efficient access of just marks/measures (getMarks(), getMeasures(), getMeasureDurations.
20:55:08 <Zakim> - +44.207.184.aaaa
20:55:09 <Zakim> - +1.650.214.aabb
20:55:09 <Zakim> -[Google]
20:55:11 <Zakim> -Plh
20:55:12 <Zakim> -nick
20:55:13 <Zakim> - +1.650.691.aacc
20:55:24 <JatinderMann> Nic: Let's review the proposals further in the mailing list and get feedback from all.
20:55:32 <simonjam> simonjam has left #webperf
20:55:42 <Zakim> -[Microsoft]
20:55:44 <Zakim> RWC_web-per(WPWG)4:00PM has ended
20:55:45 <Zakim> Attendees were [Microsoft], +44.207.184.aaaa, [Google], +1.650.214.aabb, nick, +1.650.691.aacc, Plh
21:00:39 <Zakim> RWC_web-per(WPWG)4:00PM has now started
21:00:46 <Zakim> +[Microsoft]
21:01:22 <Zakim> +??P1
21:01:24 <heycam> Zakim, ??P1 is me
21:01:24 <Zakim> +heycam; got it
21:01:27 <Zakim> +Plh
21:01:40 <JatinderMann> +Cameron
21:02:18 <plh> http://www.w3.org/2011/05/idl.svg
21:08:04 <JatinderMann> Topic: Privacy Concern
21:08:10 <JatinderMann> Jatinder: We need to close whether or not we feel that sharing the page visibility state is a privacy concern or not. Considering similar information can be found from window.onfocus and window.onblur, I recommend we don’t do any additional work here, as Page Visibility doesn’t change the existing privacy concern significantly.
21:08:15 <JatinderMann> Topic: Taking Page Visibility to First Public Working Draft
21:08:23 <JatinderMann> Jatinder: Per the charter, this spec should be at FWPD by end of this month. I feel that the Page Visibility spec is now at a stable state that we can publish it as a FWPD. Let’s set next Wednesday (6/1/11) as our date to enter First Public Working Draft.
21:08:30 <JatinderMann> I will follow up on the mailing list.
21:11:34 <JatinderMann> move to agenda 8
21:12:10 <JatinderMann> move to agenda 9
21:12:44 <JatinderMann> Jatinder: The spec isn’t clear what is the expected behavior when a duplicate callback is called. E.g., requestAnimationFrame(callback1); requestAnimationFrame(callback1); We believe the expected behavior here should be that the duplicate callback is removed from the animation frame request callback list.
21:13:56 <JatinderMann> Cameron: We should do what setTimeout does. I would suppose it calls twice?
21:17:53 <JatinderMann> Jatinder: It does call twice. But when would you need to call a callback twice for graphics? The spec needs to be clear in any case.
21:18:03 <JatinderMann> Cameron: Jatinder, can you open an issue for this?
21:18:05 <JatinderMann> Jatinder: Yes.
21:19:39 <JatinderMann> We agree to publish both Page Visibility and Timing control for script-based animations as FPWD next week. 
21:20:37 <JatinderMann> We will let the mailing list know of our intention to publish next week. Unless the WG disagrees, we will target the release next week.
21:21:45 <JatinderMann> Topic: Monotonic clock
21:23:59 <JatinderMann> Nic: As we defined in the Performance Timing specs, we defined the timing as wallclock time at the time of the page load. The timing increases monotonically, with the UTC time format and millisecond precison. We need to provide a queriable time that's comparable with existing time format.
21:26:38 <Zakim> -heycam
21:29:26 <JatinderMann> Philippe: How much long would the Last Call period be? 
21:29:33 <JatinderMann> Jatinder: It should match the Navigation Timing period.
21:29:48 <JatinderMann> Philippe: That was 4 weeks. We can target Resource Timing last call to be from June 2 - June 30.
21:29:57 <Zakim> -[Microsoft]
21:29:59 <Zakim> -Plh
21:29:59 <Zakim> RWC_web-per(WPWG)4:00PM has ended
21:30:01 <Zakim> Attendees were [Microsoft], heycam, Plh
22:05:59 <plh> plh has left #webperf
22:23:10 <jdalton> any chance that we will see a high res timer added to window.performance ?
22:23:26 <jdalton> like Chrome's microsecond() Interval method
22:27:55 <JatinderMann> We discussed potentially bringing in such a timer.
22:30:35 <JatinderMann> Issue: (duplicate callbacks): Spec needs to clarify expected behavior for duplicate calls of the same callback [Request Animation Frame]
22:30:35 <trackbot> Created ISSUE-6 - (duplicate callbacks): Spec needs to clarify expected behavior for duplicate calls of the same callback [Request Animation Frame] ; please complete additional details at http://www.w3.org/2010/webperf/track/issues/6/edit .
22:32:14 <JatinderMann> rrsagent, create minutes
22:32:14 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2011/05/25-webperf-minutes.html JatinderMann
22:46:01 <JatinderMann> Action: Zhiheng to update Resource Timing spec with the same requestStart fix made in Navigation Timing spec.
22:46:01 <trackbot> Created ACTION-34 - Update Resource Timing spec with the same requestStart fix made in Navigation Timing spec. [on Zhiheng Wang - due 2011-06-01].
22:46:16 <JatinderMann> rrsagent, create minutes
22:46:16 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2011/05/25-webperf-minutes.html JatinderMann