Re: Expected vs Actual Input Latency

[Timothy Dresser]

+input-dev, any thoughts on this? 

On Fri, Jul 1, 2016 at 3:53 PM Timothy Dresser <tdre...@chromium.org> wrote:

Doc here.

tl;dr:

Actual Input Latency is impossible to measure well except in the wild, because user input patterns are hard to predict. In CI environments, devtools, and defining a Time To Interactive metric, Expected Input Latency is superior to Actual Input Latency.

We should consider Expected Input Latency a Progressive Web Metric, but not Actual Input Latency.

[Shubhie Panicker]

It sounds like you are suggesting dropping Actual Input Latency from canonical PWMs but not ruling out the possibility of making a web perf API for this down the road.

I think it will be compelling as a web perf API in the future, but makes sense to de-prioritize for PWMs.

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Progressive Web Metrics" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to progressive-web-m...@chromium.org.
To post to this group, send email to progressive...@chromium.org.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/a/chromium.org/d/msgid/progressive-web-metrics/CAHTsfZAnzDZ8nsEWSv7Gjs7z-2XCvaeuE4S8rPZnhWQWrQteFg%40mail.gmail.com.

[Shubhie Panicker]

[Resending as I needed to join group to post]

It sounds like you are suggesting dropping Actual Input Latency from canonical PWMs but not ruling out the possibility of making a web perf API for this down the road.

I think it will be compelling as a web perf API in the future, but makes sense to de-prioritize for PWMs.

[Tim Dresser]

I agree that this could be a compelling web perf API, but I don't think it makes sense as a core PWM, at least for PWM's V1.

If no one objects, I'll remove it from the spreadsheet (or we can hold off and discuss it at our next meeting).

[Timothy Dresser]

I agree that this could be a compelling web perf API, but I don't think it makes sense as a core PWM, at least for PWM's V1.

If no one objects, I'll remove it from the spreadsheet (or we can hold off and discuss it at our next meeting).

On Mon, Jul 11, 2016 at 8:56 PM Shubhie Panicker <pani...@google.com> wrote:

[Ned]

+1 from me. Expected Input Latency seems more actionable to me. Probably worths noting that it's in the hazard metrics family. 

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/a/chromium.org/d/msgid/progressive-web-metrics/CAHTsfZB28qGWE2gjBVzpOHVvW2Sj2nztn5jXZa6LMe-RAE1jrQ%40mail.gmail.com.