See also: IRC log
<trackbot> Date: 20 July 2011
Jatinder: Should we separate
PerformanceEntry and PerformanceEntryList interfaces from the
Navigation Timing in order to avoid taking Navigation Timing to
last call? Should we add PerformanceEntry and
PerformanceEntryList to its own spec or have it live in
Resource Timing?
... Is one of the concerns that by taking the definitions out
of Navigation Timing, we can avoid taking Navigation Timing
back to last call?
Zhiheng: That is one of the concerns, but the main one is that the Timing attribute will not inherit PerformanceTiming.
Philippe: By putting PerformanceEntry into it's seperate spec, it will take at least three months before it can get to recommended. That means that Navigation Timing will not be able to move forward for at least three months.
Jatinder: Now that Navigation Timing has a complete test suite and two implementations, what remains to do for Navigation Timing to get to Recommended.
Philippe: Navigation Timing will
depend on HTML5 and WebIDL specs. For HTML5, we can take an
exception, but we will still need to wait for WebIDL to mature
before we can take Navigation Timing to Recommended.
... We should seperate the PerformanceEntry and
PerformanceEntryList into a new spec.
Jatinder: Why don't we call the new spec Performance Timeline, as that is what we refer to it currently.
James: I like the name.
Philippe: Remove supplemental from User Timing and use Partial.
Action Jatinder to update User Timing and Page Visibility specs to use Partial in the IDL.
<trackbot> Created ACTION-41 - Update User Timing and Page Visibility specs to use Partial in the IDL. [on Jatinder Mann - due 2011-07-27].
Action Jatinder to remove PerformanceEntry and PerformanceEntryList and associated methods from Navigation Timing into a new Performance Timeline spec.
<trackbot> Created ACTION-42 - Remove PerformanceEntry and PerformanceEntryList and associated methods from Navigation Timing into a new Performance Timeline spec. [on Jatinder Mann - due 2011-07-27].
Jatinder: Once Performance
Timeline spec has been published, we can take both Performance
Timeline and User Timing to first public working draft next
week 7/27.
... Per WG decision, Page Visibility spec will be in Last Call
from July 21st to August 18th.
Action Jatinder to add reference to WebIDL in the Page Visibility spec.
<trackbot> Created ACTION-44 - Add reference to WebIDL in the Page Visibility spec. [on Jatinder Mann - due 2011-07-27].
Cameron: I don't have any updates this week. James said on the mailing list that he will have some updates.
Philippe: We now have a new testing framework, I will go ahead and move the test suites to this framework. There may be bugs that I may open based on this move.
Jatinder: Considering James and Jason aren't on the call today, we can hold on the setImmediate discussion today.
Philippe: Cameron, how is the WebIDL Last Call coming?
Cameron: I'm working on spec bugs currently.
Philippe: Is it your sentiment that WebIDL spec will go to another Last Call?
Cameron: It may seem like a second last call is necessary.
This is scribe.perl Revision: 1.136 of Date: 2011/05/12 12:01:43 Check for newer version at http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/~checkout~/2002/scribe/ Guessing input format: RRSAgent_Text_Format (score 1.00) No ScribeNick specified. Guessing ScribeNick: JatinderMann Inferring Scribes: JatinderMann WARNING: Replacing list of attendees. Old list: [Microsoft] Plh +1.650.691.aaaa +1.650.214.aabb New list: Plh [Microsoft] heycam Default Present: Plh, [Microsoft], heycam Present: Plh [Microsoft] heycam JatinderMann TonyG NicJansma Philippe Zhiheng WARNING: No meeting chair found! You should specify the meeting chair like this: <dbooth> Chair: dbooth Found Date: 20 Jul 2011 Guessing minutes URL: http://www.w3.org/2011/07/20-webperf-minutes.html People with action items:[End of scribe.perl diagnostic output]