On 8/10/10 2:40 PM, Mike Belshe wrote:
For now, I believe the Chrome/WebKit teams are in agreement that
sacrificing time-to-first render to decrease PLT is a bad idea. I'm not
sure what the firefox philosophy here is?
Fairly similar (though we have had people complain at us when we do in
fact
On Mon, Aug 9, 2010 at 1:40 PM, Justin Lebar wrote:
> > Can you provide the content of the page which you used in your
> whitepaper?
> > (https://bug529208.bugzilla.mozilla.org/attachment.cgi?id=455820)
>
> I'll post this to the bug when I get home tonight. But your comments
> are astute -- the
The files I used for the rough benchmarks are available in a tarball
at [1]. Live pages are at [2] and [3].
[1] http://people.mozilla.org/~jlebar/respkg/test/benchmark_files.tgz
[2] http://people.mozilla.org/~jlebar/respkg/test/test-pkg.html
[3] http://people.mozilla.org/~jlebar/respkg/test/test-
On 8/9/10 4:30 PM, Mike Belshe wrote:
CNN is always cited as a "bad page", but it's really not - it just has a lot of
content, both below and above the
fold.
It's a bad page because 1) It sends hundreds of kilobytes of content for
no obvious reason whatsoever; most of it is unused and 2) it s
> Can you provide the content of the page which you used in your whitepaper?
> (https://bug529208.bugzilla.mozilla.org/attachment.cgi?id=455820)
I'll post this to the bug when I get home tonight. But your comments
are astute -- the page I used is a pretty bad benchmark for a variety
of reasons.
Justin -
Can you provide the content of the page which you used in your whitepaper? (
https://bug529208.bugzilla.mozilla.org/attachment.cgi?id=455820)
I have a few concerns about the benchmark:
a) Looks like pages were loaded exactly once, as per your notes? How
hard is it to run the tests lo
On Mon, Aug 9, 2010 at 9:47 AM, Aryeh Gregor wrote:
> If UAs can assume that files with the same path
> are the same regardless of whether they came from a resource package
> or which, and they have all but a couple of the files cached, they
> could request those directly instead of from the resou
On Fri, Aug 6, 2010 at 7:40 PM, Justin Lebar wrote:
> I think this is a fair point. But I'd suggest we consider the following:
>
> * It might be confusing for resources from a resource package to show
> up on a page which doesn't "opt-in" to resource packages in general or
> to that specific reso
> So if resource packages don't share caches, you need to either give up
> on caching, [or] put a given file only in one resource package on your
> whole site. The latter is not practical if pages use small, fairly
> random subsets of your assets and it's not feasible to package them
> all on ever
On Tue, Aug 3, 2010 at 8:31 PM, Justin Lebar wrote:
> We at Mozilla are hoping to ship HTML resource packages in Firefox 4,
> and we wanted to get the WhatWG's feedback on the feature.
>
> For the impatient, the spec is here:
>
> http://people.mozilla.org/~jlebar/respkg/
I have some concerns a
On Fri, Aug 6, 2010 at 12:46 AM, Christoph Päper
wrote:
> Justin Lebar:
>> Christoph Päper wrote:
>>>
>>> Why do you want to put this on the HTML level (exclusively), not the HTTP
>>> level?
>>
>> If you reference an image from a CSS file and include that CSS file in an
>> HTML file which uses
On Fri, Aug 6, 2010 at 12:46 AM, Christoph Päper
wrote:
> Justin Lebar:
>> Christoph Päper wrote:
>>>
>>> Why do you want to put this on the HTML level (exclusively), not the HTTP
>>> level?
>>
>> If you reference an image from a CSS file and include that CSS file in an
>> HTML file which uses
Justin Lebar:
> Christoph Päper wrote:
>>
>> Why do you want to put this on the HTML level (exclusively), not the HTTP
>> level?
>
> If you reference an image from a CSS file and include that CSS file in an
> HTML file which uses resource packages, the image can be loaded from the
> resource
2010/8/4 Kornel Lesiński
> On 4 Aug 2010, at 11:46, Diego Perini wrote:
>
> > > * Argument: What about incremental rendering?
> > > If there are, for instance, lots of (content) images in the resource
> file I will see them all at once as soon as the ZIP has been downloaded
> completely and decom
> If you do want it to work the same then you'll need to hook into the
> parser and ignore dynamic updates.
Indeed. And since I explicitly *do* want dynamic updates, it'll need to change.
Thanks.
On Wed, Aug 4, 2010 at 1:32 PM, Philip Taylor wrote:
> On Wed, Aug 4, 2010 at 9:01 PM, Justin Leba
On Wed, Aug 4, 2010 at 9:01 PM, Justin Lebar wrote:
>> What happens if the document contains multiple elements (not
>> all the root element)? (e.g. if it's XHTML, or the elements are added
>> by scripts). The packages spec seems to assume there is only ever one.
>
> The packages attribute should
> Brett Zamir wrote:
> 1) I think it would be nice to see explicit confirmation in the spec that
> this works with offline caching.
Yes. I'll do that.
> 2) Could data files such as .txt, .json, or .xml files be used as part of
> such a package as well?
> 3) Can XMLHttpRequest be made to refer
People should probably consider reading the Web Apps Widgets working
group archives (they're public) about widget packaging.
There are long discussions about zip and gzip, etc.
http://www.w3.org/TR/widgets/#zip-archive
Especially http://www.w3.org/TR/widgets/#character-sets covers character sets
On 4 Aug 2010, at 11:46, Diego Perini wrote:
> > * Argument: What about incremental rendering?
> > If there are, for instance, lots of (content) images in the resource file I
> > will see them all at once as soon as the ZIP has been downloaded completely
> > and decompressed, but with single fil
On Wed, Aug 4, 2010 at 1:31 AM, Justin Lebar wrote:
> We at Mozilla are hoping to ship HTML resource packages in Firefox 4,
> and we wanted to get the WhatWG's feedback on the feature.
>
> For the impatient, the spec is here:
>
> http://people.mozilla.org/~jlebar/respkg/
It seems a bit surpris
On Wed, Aug 4, 2010 at 12:11 PM, James May wrote:
> On 4 August 2010 20:08, Christoph Päper
> wrote:
> > * Argument: What about incremental rendering?
> > If there are, for instance, lots of (content) images in the resource file
> I will see them all at once as soon as the ZIP has been downloade
On 4 August 2010 20:08, Christoph Päper wrote:
> * Argument: What about incremental rendering?
> If there are, for instance, lots of (content) images in the resource file I
> will see them all at once as soon as the ZIP has been downloaded completely
> and decompressed, but with single files I w
Justin Lebar:
> We at Mozilla are hoping to ship HTML resource packages in Firefox 4,
>http://people.mozilla.org/~jlebar/respkg/
|
> A page indicates in its element that it uses one or more resource
> packages (…).
Why do you want to put this on the HTML level (exclusively), not the HTTP l
On Aug 3, 2010, at 5:31 PM, Justin Lebar wrote:
> We at Mozilla are hoping to ship HTML resource packages in Firefox 4,
> and we wanted to get the WhatWG's feedback on the feature.
>
> For the impatient, the spec is here:
>
>http://people.mozilla.org/~jlebar/respkg/
>
> and the bug (comple
This is and was a great idea. A few points/questions:
1) I think it would be nice to see explicit confirmation in the spec
that this works with offline caching.
2) Could data files such as .txt, .json, or .xml files be used as part
of such a package as well?
3) Can XMLHttpRequest be made t
On Tue, Aug 3, 2010 at 5:31 PM, Justin Lebar wrote:
> We at Mozilla are hoping to ship HTML resource packages in Firefox 4,
> and we wanted to get the WhatWG's feedback on the feature.
>
> For the impatient, the spec is here:
>
> http://people.mozilla.org/~jlebar/respkg/
>
> and the bug (comple
We at Mozilla are hoping to ship HTML resource packages in Firefox 4,
and we wanted to get the WhatWG's feedback on the feature.
For the impatient, the spec is here:
http://people.mozilla.org/~jlebar/respkg/
and the bug (complete with builds you can try and some preliminary
performance numbe
27 matches
Mail list logo
