W3C

Web Performance Working Group Teleconference

07 Mar 2012

See also: IRC log

Attendees

Present
JatinderMann, Luke, zhiheng, James
Regrets
plh,jason,arvind
Chair
Jatinder
Scribe
JatinderMann

Contents


<trackbot> Date: 07 March 2012

<scribe> scribe: JatinderMann

Navigation Timing

Jatinder: Per Philippe's comment, the LC period for WebIDL is over and the editor reports that he is optimistic in resolving the comments this week. As such, the webapps should be in a position to move it to CR within two weeks. That means that we could get a PR for nivagation timing for the end of the month.

Resource Timing

http://www.w3.org/2012/02/resource-timing-lc-issues.html

http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-web-perf/2011Sep/0009.html

The startTime attribute must return a DOMHighResTimeStamp with the time immediately before the user agent starts to queue the resource for fetching. If there are HTTP redirects or equivalent when fetching the resource and if all the redirects or equivalent are from the same origin as the current document, this attribute must return the same value as redirectStart. Otherwise, this attribute must return the same value as fetchStart.

Jatinder: Nic's question was about whether the current spec text was our intention?

James: Yes, it was.

Zhiheng: Agreed.

http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-web-perf/2011Oct/0042.html

James: Looks like we just want to make the diagram clearer.

Jatinder: Sounds good. Zhiheng, do you have the original powerpoint for the diagram?

Zhiheng: Yes, I will share.

http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-web-perf/2011Nov/0016.html

Jatinder: Per James Graham: Also, since the current wording evidently causes confusion.
... We currently say no exceptiuons.

James: We should say 'no additional exceptions'.

Jatinder: Once thes issues have been dealt with we will have responded to all last call issues.

User Timing

http://www.w3.org/2012/02/user-timing-lc-issues.html

https://dvcs.w3.org/hg/webperf/raw-file/d1498d8e0e5e/specs/UserTiming/Overview.html#privacy

James: His comments are fair, we should just update the wording.

Performance Timeline

Jatinder: There are no performance timeline last call issues.
... Once we have made the changes we discussed today, there will be no open last call issues on any of these specs. These specs can move to the CR phase.

High Resolution Time

Jatinder: I have responded to all feedbak to the spec. In particular, the text on subsequent deltas not being equal to zero has been is acceptable by the definition of monotonically increasing. Further, I have simplified the IDL definition.

James: We have one remaining question on the security issue. I have sent mail to our security team.

Jatinder: I will speak to Eric Lawrence on our end.

James: Let's also email the mailing list that Tony had emailed previously.

Jatinder: I recommend we take the security issue as a last call issue for this spec.
... Are we in favor of moving this spec to Last Call?

James: Yes, let's move it to last call and take the security question as a last call issue.

Ziheng: I am okay with Last Call.

Jatinder: Let's keep the standard time frame for last call.

Resolved: Publish High Resolution Timing as FPWD / LC

Summary of Action Items

[End of minutes]

Minutes formatted by David Booth's scribe.perl version 1.136 (CVS log)
$Date: 2012/03/09 20:46:01 $