See also: IRC log
<trackbot> Date: 11 April 2012
<scribe> scribe: JatinderMann
plh: The good news is WebIDL is moving to CR, hopefully next week. This means we should plan to move Navigation Timing to PR.
http://www.w3.org/2012/04/navigation_timing_cr_results.html
plh: In these tests, I notice IE9 fails two tests, where as IE10 fails a test that IE9 passes. Comments Jatinder, Karen?
Karen: We discussed the two tests that IE9 failed, and we have fixed that in IE10. We will downport that fix at some point.
<plh> http://w3c-test.org/webperf/tests/approved/navigation-timing/html5/test_timing_attributes_order.html
plh: The test_timing_attributes_order.html is passing in IE10, failing IE9, Chrome and Firefox.
Karen: I wonder if the bug is in the test case, we should look into that.
plh: It looks like there was an action item on updating the test_timing_attributes_order.html that may have not been completed. http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-web-perf/2012Apr/0020.html
Karen: I will look into it.
Action Karen to look into test_timing_attributes_order.html to make sure it is correct.
<trackbot> Created ACTION-99 - Look into test_timing_attributes_order.html to make sure it is correct. [on Karen Anderson - due 2012-04-18].
<plh> http://w3c-test.org/webperf/tests/approved/navigation-timing/html5/test_timing_attributes_order.html
<plh> http://w3c-test.org/webperf/tests/approved/navigation-timing/html5/test_navigation_type_reload.html
<plh> Fail Reload loadEventEnd(0) == Original loadEventEnd(1334164524631) assert_equals: Reload loadEventEnd(0) == Original loadEventEnd(1334164524631) expected 1334164524631 but got 0
<plh> http://w3c-test.org/framework/results/nav-timing-default/
Karen: We should let Boris follow up on the test_navigation_type_reload, as Firefox is the only UA failing.
plh: We should be good to submit very soon.
JatindeR:
http://dvcs.w3.org/hg/webperf/raw-file/tip/specs/ResourceTiming/Overview.html#performanceresourcetiming-methods
... The spec isn't clear on what to do when
onresourcetimingbufferfull isn't defined. Should we have a
circular buffer or throw things that are spilled over?
... Should we update the processing model to state that if the
onresourcefull callback isn't defined we just don't add the
resource to the primary buffer
Action Jatinder to update Resource Timing processing model to take care of the case that onresourcetimingbufferfull isn't defined
<trackbot> Created ACTION-100 - Update Resource Timing processing model to take care of the case that onresourcetimingbufferfull isn't defined [on Jatinder Mann - due 2012-04-18].
Jatinder: Updates measure method
without any parameters to store the duration from
navigationStart to the current time, rather than fetchStart to
the current time
... Updated all examples to include sub-millisecond
resolution
... ○ Throws an INVALID_ACCESS_ERR exception if either
startMark or endMark argument, or both, have the same name as a
PerformanceTiming attribute with a "DOMHighResTimeStamp" time
value of 0.
... I deleted that text.
Jatinder: To make the behavior
very clear, updated Section 4.4 startTime attribute to return
0, per WG discussion last week.
... I responded to the NAvigation Timing attributes in High
Resolution Time in this mailing list topic:
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-web-perf/2012Apr/0027.html
Tony: I will ask James to respond to that topic.
Jatinder: I made the following high resolution time updates: updated DOMHighResTimeStamp definition to take into account durations, updated DOMHighResTimeStamp definition to recommend microsecond resolution on millisecond units, added a note saying if sub-millisecond not possible, should return millisecond, resolution in millisecond unit, added a note saying that time spent not fully active is not excluded from current time
plh: Do we want to go TPAC this
November in France?
... If I recall, other than interacting with Cameron, we didn't
work too much with other groups.
Arvind: I agree that we didn't interact with other groups and the overhead might be significant.
Tony: I agree, we should maybe just meet on the west coast.
Jatinder: I think there is value in our WG face to face meeting, but I do see that the overhead is high for France and we don't usually interact with other WGs as well.
Arvind: We should probably poll the mailing list, but it feels like a no for France. I
plh: I will follow up.
<plh> https://www.w3.org/2000/09/dbwg/details?group=45211&public=1&order=org
plh: Looks like we have decided not to do the face to face in France.
<plh> Future Web Technology, Baidu, Infraware, Qihoo 360, SK Telecom, Tencent
Jatinder: I have made the following updates: updated Section 4.2 to move non-normative statements into notes and capitalized, MUST and MAY statements, added prerender as an optional state, added definition of the preview state, added an editorial note for Issue 8, added hook to HTML5 unloading processing model in the Page Visibility processing model
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) Found Scribe: JatinderMann Inferring ScribeNick: JatinderMann Default Present: +1.650.253.aaaa, +1.404.978.aabb, [Microsoft], +43.732.908.2aacc, Plh Present: +1.650.253.aaaa +1.404.978.aabb [Microsoft] +43.732.908.2aacc Plh JatinderMann Alois plh KarenAnderson Arvind Tony WARNING: No meeting chair found! You should specify the meeting chair like this: <dbooth> Chair: dbooth Found Date: 11 Apr 2012 Guessing minutes URL: http://www.w3.org/2012/04/11-webperf-minutes.html People with action items:[End of scribe.perl diagnostic output]