16:56:00 <RRSAgent> RRSAgent has joined #webperf
16:56:00 <RRSAgent> logging to http://www.w3.org/2012/07/11-webperf-irc
16:56:02 <trackbot> RRSAgent, make logs world
16:56:02 <Zakim> Zakim has joined #webperf
16:56:04 <trackbot> Zakim, this will be WPWG
16:56:04 <Zakim> I do not see a conference matching that name scheduled within the next hour, trackbot
16:56:05 <trackbot> Meeting: Web Performance Working Group Teleconference
16:56:05 <trackbot> Date: 11 July 2012
17:06:19 <JatinderMann> Topic: Navigation Timing
17:16:34 <JatinderMann> Jatinder: There were four pieces of feedback to this spec in the last few weeks.
17:16:44 <JatinderMann> [NavigationTiming] Uniqueness requirement for PerformanceTiming doesn't make much sense - http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-web-perf/2012Jun/0047.html
17:16:59 <JatinderMann> Jatinder: Zhiheng made the proper spec update here and resolved the issue.
17:17:07 <JatinderMann> [NavigationTiming] Not sure what the spec text about sorting PerformanceTiming objects means - http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-web-perf/2012Jun/0049.html
17:17:17 <JatinderMann> Zhiheng made the proper spec update here as well.
17:17:24 <JatinderMann> James: I saw that, yes.
17:17:33 <JatinderMann> [NavigationTiming] Issues in the document.open test (or perhaps in the spec, if the test is correct) - http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-web-perf/2012Jul/0022.html
17:18:00 <JatinderMann> Jatinder: To resolve the issue of ensuring document.open/.write/.close does not impact Navigation Timing and defining what is a navigation in Navigation Timing, can be achieved by referencing http://www.w3.org/TR/html5/single-page.html#navigate in the Navigation Timing spec.That reference excludes dynamic markup insertion. Zhiheng to make that update.
17:18:06 <JatinderMann> James: That looks like a good update to me.
17:18:17 <JatinderMann> Unclear note about "maintain the DOM structure of the document in memory" - http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-web-perf/2012Jun/0029.html
17:19:14 <JatinderMann> Jatinder: I believe we were trying to capture the scenario when traversing from a bfcache and not hitting the network, we shouldn't update the timing data for that page from when it had initially hit the network. I believe the definition of navigation doesn't explicitly include history traversal. If so, this might be out of scope anyway. I will close loop with Boris.
17:19:26 <JatinderMann> Jatinder: Considering all feedback has been responded to, I propose we take this spec to PR next week and schedule the call with the Director.
17:19:43 <JatinderMann> James: I agree that there aren't any additional pieces of feedback.
17:19:49 <JatinderMann> James: Let's take this spec to PR.
17:19:57 <JatinderMann> Topic: Performance Timeline
17:20:05 <JatinderMann> Jatinder: Seeing that Performance Timeline has been stable and has had no feedback for quite some time, I propose we take this spec to CR next week and schedule the call with the Director.
17:20:18 <JatinderMann> James: I believe we agreed to that two weeks ago. Let's move it to CR next week.
17:20:25 <JatinderMann> Topic: Resource Timing
17:20:43 <JatinderMann> Jatinder: I have responded to all feedback on the Resource Timing spec. As this spec is already in CR, we should start working on a test suite and implementations.
17:21:22 <JatinderMann> James: I have been working on a test suite for this spec. I will move them to the submission folder. Can you review them?
17:21:33 <JatinderMann> Jatinder: Yes, I can review them as soon as they are available. Thanks,
17:21:37 <JatinderMann> Topic: User Timing
17:22:18 <JatinderMann> Jatinder: User Timing spec only has one piece of feedback remaining and that is to review the getMarks/getMeasures APIs as they are redundant.
17:23:10 <JatinderMann> Jatinder: I don't like the argument of sticking with generalized APIs vs specialized. We shouldn't restrict our API set on that principal.
17:23:42 <JatinderMann> James: I agree with that principal. I just don't think getMarks/getMeasures is the best example of specialized as they offer very similar data as the PErformance timeline provides.
17:24:03 <JatinderMann> Jatinder: Okay, let's make this change. I will respond to this Last Call feedback.
17:24:28 <JatinderMann> James: As there are no additional feedback and the rest of the spec has remained stable for some time, I recommend we take this spec to CR soon.
17:24:42 <JatinderMann> Jatinder: I agree. Let's schedule the call next week.
17:24:48 <JatinderMann> Topic: Page Visibility
17:24:55 <JatinderMann> Jatinder: As there is no outstanding feedback on this spec and the spec has been very stable for a long time, we have two implementations and a test suite, I propose we take this spec to CR. 
17:25:14 <JatinderMann> James: If feedback has been met, I don't disagree.
17:25:34 <JatinderMann> rrsagent, generate minutes
17:25:34 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2012/07/11-webperf-minutes.html JatinderMann
17:29:31 <JatinderMann> Jason: Excellent seeing progress being made.
17:29:34 <JatinderMann> rrsagent, generate minutes
17:29:34 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2012/07/11-webperf-minutes.html JatinderMann
19:08:58 <Zakim> Zakim has left #webperf