-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 30
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
It is not defined what "The PerformanceNavigationTiming interface participates in the [PERFORMANCE-TIMELINE-2] " means #46
Comments
Oh, maybe I can understand this now... It is queued |
indeed, it's queued in step 27 of the processing model. "participates" means it gets exposed through the performance timeline (getEntries*, perf observers). Performance timeline never mentions what participation means. I could certainly add something in perf timeline and then link the word participate to it if you think it would help. |
yes, that would help and "extends the following attributes of the PerformanceEntry interface." is also very weirdly said, since nothing is extended there. |
@plehegar do we really need to? Now that we have a hook to queue the entries for delivery via PerformanObserver, I think it's implicit. I think we could just drop the "participates" stuff altogether to keep thing simple? |
I believe this is a near duplicate of w3c/resource-timing#55? |
Dropped "participates" language in a2b8521. As noted earlier, steps 27 & 28 ("add" and "queue") already provide the necessary hooks. |
one comment on this one: should we use "affects the following attributes" instead of "extends the following attributes"? |
shrug.. not sure on this one. FWIW, we use "extends" in other specs. If there is a strong argument for "affects" I'm happy to change those -- let me know. |
If you're not sure, then let's keep the text as-is. |
How does an interface "participate" something else?
Does it just mean that some PerformanceEntry objects are queued? If so, when?
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: