18:00:47 <RRSAgent> RRSAgent has joined #webperf
18:00:47 <RRSAgent> logging to http://www.w3.org/2013/01/30-webperf-irc
18:00:49 <trackbot> RRSAgent, make logs world
18:00:51 <trackbot> Zakim, this will be WPWG
18:00:51 <Zakim> I do not see a conference matching that name scheduled within the next hour, trackbot
18:00:52 <trackbot> Meeting: Web Performance Working Group Teleconference
18:00:52 <trackbot> Date: 30 January 2013
18:03:35 <JatinderMann> present+ Alois
18:03:39 <JatinderMann> present+ Ganesh
18:03:44 <JatinderMann> present+ James
18:04:23 <JatinderMann> Topic: Test Cases
18:09:53 <JatinderMann> Jatinder: Considering the Page Visibility test cases have been reviewed and approved, we should move them to the approved folder.
18:14:09 <JatinderMann> Jatinder: Any objections?
18:14:15 <JatinderMann> James: No objections.
18:16:12 <JatinderMann> Jatinder: Considering the spec has no additional feedback and is in CR, we have three implementations, and a full test suite, I recommend we move the spec to PR.
18:16:40 <JatinderMann> Jatinder: Any objections?
18:17:39 <JatinderMann> Daniel: No objections, let's move it forward.
18:22:15 <JatinderMann> Jatinder: I noticed that Intel has submitted new Resource Timing test cases.
18:22:23 <JatinderMann> Ganesh: Yes, we had uploaded new test cases.
18:22:34 <JatinderMann> Jatinder: James, would you like to review those test cases?
18:22:46 <JatinderMann> James: I had already reviewed them prior, as a part of the webkit test cases.
18:22:56 <JatinderMann> Jatinder: Okay, I'll take an action to review these test cases.
18:23:15 <JatinderMann> Jatinder: I'll also take the action to move the Page Visibility test cases from submission to approved.
18:23:32 <JatinderMann> Topic: Feedback on Specifications
18:24:49 <JatinderMann> Jatinder: On the issue of duplicate resources, I had sent mail, http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-web-perf/2013Jan/0033.html, stating that I believed the spec to be clear in both cases where two requestors are requesting the same resource in the same document and different documents. I consider this issue closed.
18:25:29 <JatinderMann> James: Yes, I'd reviewed the mail. Looks good to me. I noticed your email had referred to the browser, but I think you meant document. We should make sure the spec is correct in that wording.
18:25:40 <JatinderMann> Jatinder: Yes, I meant document. I'll follow up on the spec.
18:26:08 <JatinderMann> Jatinder: There were issues raised on whether we should include protocol information or byte size information in Resource Timing L2. Thoughts on that?
18:26:43 <JatinderMann> James: I feel that the interface should only include novel information that isn't easily available today. The server serving the resources already knows the size of the images.
18:27:36 <JatinderMann> Alois: Even for cross-origin resources, this information seems like something someone may want just for debugging purposes.
18:28:02 <JatinderMann> Jatinder: I feel that for the protocol information, it may be a bit too early to include SPDY, considering that the HTTP2.0 spec is still in the early stages.
18:28:21 <JatinderMann> Daniel: I recommend we don't close out on these issues, but instead suggest that it's early to discuss now.
18:28:33 <JatinderMann> Jatinder: We can follow up on the mailng list.
18:29:24 <JatinderMann> Jatinder: Considering Timing control for script-based animations (requestAnimationFrame) spec no longer has any open issues, there are three implementations, I recommend we move this spec to CR, as we had discussed last week. Are there any objections?
18:29:34 <JatinderMann> James: No objections, we should move.
18:29:50 <JatinderMann> present+ Daniel Austin
18:29:53 <JatinderMann> present+ PLH
18:30:07 <JatinderMann> rrsagent, generate minutes
18:30:07 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2013/01/30-webperf-minutes.html JatinderMann