On Sat, Jan 13, 2024 at 4:32 AM Yoav Weiss <[email protected]> wrote:
> Thanks for working on this important problem! :) > Thanks for reviewing, I realize that the chromestatus entry was erroneous/lacking in a few important bits, let me try to rectify this :) Updating the chromestatus entry and posting the missing links in the reply. > On Fri, Jan 12, 2024 at 11:31 AM Noam Rosenthal <[email protected]> > wrote: > >> Contact [email protected] >> >> Explainer >> https://github.com/w3c/longtasks/blob/loaf-explainer/loaf-explainer.md >> > > Can the explainer be updated? e.g. I'm assuming that the "this is a work > in progress... lots of things might change" disclaimer is no longer valid. > Done https://github.com/w3c/longtasks/pull/130 > Beyond that, the script attribution parts are not really explained outside > of examples. Is there some developer-facing documentation covering that > elsewhere? > For example, it'd be good to cover how code is attributed for async calls, > Promises that got resolved, etc. > Yes: https://developer.chrome.com/docs/web-platform/long-animation-frames There was no slot in chromestatus to add this but this one is much more comprehensive than the explainer. > > >> >> Specificationhttps://w3c.github.io/longtasks/ >> <https://github.com/w3c/longtasks/blob/main/loaf-explainer.md> >> > > The link above is broken. I think you meant > https://w3c.github.io/longtasks/#sec-PerformanceLongTaskTiming > Specifically https://w3c.github.io/longtasks/#sec-loaf-timing > > Regarding the spec, I see that it's monkeypatching WebIDL, DOM and HTML. > This feels odd in a WG-adopted spec. > Have you tried to PR these changes upstream? > > > >> >> >> Summary >> >> This is an extension of long tasks. It measures the task together with >> its subsequent rendering update, adding information such as long running >> scripts, rendering time, and time spent in forced layout and style ("layout >> thrashing"). Developers can use this as a diagnostic for "sluggishness", >> which is measured by INP, by finding the causes for main-thread congestion >> which is often the cause for bad INP. >> >> >> Blink componentBlink>PerformanceAPIs >> <https://bugs.chromium.org/p/chromium/issues/list?q=component:Blink%3EPerformanceAPIs> >> >> TAG reviewhttps://github.com/w3ctag/design-reviews/issues/911 >> > > The discussion seems to still be ongoing.. > Fair, though the discussion rehashes problems that were discussed when we shipped long tasks and didn't introduce new concerns. I have addressed all the concerns raised but it's up to the reviewer to respond to that. This was 1 month ago. We can also discuss them here or in another forum, or if we want to block until the TAG reviewer is satisfied with all the answers we can do that. > >> >> >> TAG review statusIssues addressed >> > >> >> Chromium Trial NameLongAnimationFrameTiming >> >> Link to origin trial feedback summaryhttps://github.com/w3c/longtasks >> >> Origin Trial documentation link >> https://github.com/w3c/longtasks/blob/main/loaf-explainer.md >> >> Risks >> >> >> Interoperability and Compatibility >> >> >> >> *Gecko*: Positive Not yet a formal signal but showed positive interest >> at WG call. >> > https://github.com/mozilla/standards-positions/issues/929 (I also corrected the entry to say "No signal", the positive signals were only informal as I stated in the note) > >> *WebKit*: No signal >> > > Can you link to the position requests? > https://github.com/WebKit/standards-positions/issues/283 > > >> >> *Web developers*: Positive ( >> https://twitter.com/jebbacca/status/1653355406368952321) Wix, Microsoft, >> RUMVision and others have already experimented with this in Canary. Strong >> excitement from several partners at We Love Speed conference. >> >> *Other signals*: >> >> Ergonomics >> >> It should work well with other performance timeline entries, mainly >> event-timing/INP. >> >> >> Security >> >> This feature exposes rendering time to iframes, which might be >> cross-origin (same-process). This is already observable today, by using >> requestAnimationFrame. Underwent internal security review. Note that >> everything in this feature is same-process. >> >> >> WebView application risks >> >> Does this intent deprecate or change behavior of existing APIs, such that >> it has potentially high risk for Android WebView-based applications? >> >> N/A >> >> >> Debuggability >> >> >> >> Will this feature be supported on all six Blink platforms (Windows, Mac, >> Linux, ChromeOS, Android, and Android WebView)?Yes >> >> Is this feature fully tested by web-platform-tests >> <https://chromium.googlesource.com/chromium/src/+/main/docs/testing/web_platform_tests.md> >> ?Yes >> >> >> https://wpt.fyi/results/long-animation-frame/tentative?label=experimental&label=master&aligned >> >> >> Flag name on chrome://flagsLongAnimationFrameTiming >> >> Finch feature nameNone >> >> Non-finch justificationNone >> >> Requires code in //chrome?False >> >> Tracking bughttps://bugs.chromium.org/p/chromium/issues/detail?id=1392685 >> >> Launch bughttps://launch.corp.google.com/launch/4244858 >> >> Adoption expectationThe origin trial was a big success, and opted into >> by both major companies (Wix, Microsoft, Google), smaller companies and >> several RUM providers. >> >> Adoption planShipping it in stable (with a minor API change that is >> underway) is already on track for wide adoption due to very positive >> response to origin trial. >> >> Estimated milestones >> Shipping on desktop 123 >> OriginTrial desktop last 123 >> OriginTrial desktop first 116 >> Shipping on Android 123 >> OriginTrial Android last 123 >> OriginTrial Android first 116 >> Shipping on WebView 123 >> OriginTrial webView last 123 >> OriginTrial webView first 116 >> Shipping on WebView 123 >> >> Anticipated spec changes >> >> Open questions about a feature may be a source of future web compat or >> interop issues. Please list open issues (e.g. links to known github issues >> in the project for the feature specification) whose resolution may >> introduce web compat/interop risk (e.g., changing to naming or structure of >> the API in a non-backward-compatible way). >> None. The issues raised in the TAG reviewed were previously addressed in >> the security review of this feature, and need some clarification but not >> spec changes. >> >> Link to entry on the Chrome Platform Status >> https://chromestatus.com/feature/6118675067699200 >> > > Can you tick the other review boxes on the entry? > Not sure I understand what boxes? It's been 2 months since filing the official position and about a year since we discussed this in WebPerfWG, and we haven't received a formal signal from Gecko/WebKit, only informal (somewhat positive) sentiment. In the meantime the origin trial has been very successful, and the list of things missing in the implementation is pretty close to zero. Happy to proceed in whatever way the API owners see fit. > >> >> >> Links to previous Intent discussionsIntent to prototype: >> https://groups.google.com/a/chromium.org/d/msgid/blink-dev/CAJn%3DMYbX%3DEOAwkEvDQY9Ja1trSXLFtM1XNsuw1Lr2QR88%2BTnqw%40mail.gmail.com >> Intent >> to Experiment: >> https://groups.google.com/a/chromium.org/d/msgid/blink-dev/CAJn%3DMYbdL3atq6FvsfrR%3DVs%2Boexvt04zfjV97BNNPL76iPTGLg%40mail.gmail.com >> Intent to Extend Experiment: >> https://groups.google.com/a/chromium.org/g/blink-dev/c/MClbXXUhOTs >> Intent to Ship: >> https://groups.google.com/a/chromium.org/g/blink-dev/c/MClbXXUhOTs >> >> >> This intent message was generated by Chrome Platform Status >> <https://chromestatus.com/>. >> >> -- >> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups >> "blink-dev" group. >> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an >> email to [email protected]. >> To view this discussion on the web visit >> https://groups.google.com/a/chromium.org/d/msgid/blink-dev/CAJn%3DMYZ9AtHwBuXzz%3D7B7wZyrGqbhv5F%2BYVxDm8Lc6TV2LEkDg%40mail.gmail.com >> <https://groups.google.com/a/chromium.org/d/msgid/blink-dev/CAJn%3DMYZ9AtHwBuXzz%3D7B7wZyrGqbhv5F%2BYVxDm8Lc6TV2LEkDg%40mail.gmail.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer> >> . >> > -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "blink-dev" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/a/chromium.org/d/msgid/blink-dev/CAJn%3DMYY8jFmRmzGSLdsJ7aWvvw6Db9XMP1M22dK7OhbGytheMA%40mail.gmail.com.
