On Fri, Aug 5, 2016 at 3:39 PM Ilya Grigorik <igrigo...@google.com> wrote:
> > On Fri, Aug 5, 2016 at 3:22 PM, Shubhie Panicker <panic...@google.com> > wrote: > >> - Re: extensions >> We *may* be able to indicate something generic here. Prior investigation >> <https://codereview.chromium.org/1615523002/> indicates that it's very >> difficult to properly account for scripts spawned by extensions. >> > > I think we want to be really careful with this one.. Yes, extensions can > definitely affect runtime of the page, both in the early stages of the page > load and while the page is active, and it would be nice to get a handle on > that. However, we can't simply expose which extensions (e.g. script urls > and related bits) the user is running due to security/privacy concerns. > > It's a problem worth thinking about, but I would mark it as an explicit > non-goal for the v1 we're discussing here.. > Speculating a bit, I could imagine a response header for the main resource that instructs the browser to observe long tasks from the beginning of the page load and make them available to PerformanceObserver. I think it's probably a solvable problem, but there's a ton of details to work out, so definitely not a V1 feature. Also, by the time we get around to trying to solve this, we may have better general RUM support that Shubhie alluded to and not need to solve it with this API.
