-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 31
Performance impact? #112
Comments
As this is highly variable and depends on the page structure, network, user device and UA defined behavior, I don't think quantifying the performance advantage of preload should be part of the spec. You can see external blog posts (such as @addyosmani's article) or research papers (such as VROOM) for more details on said performance benefits. |
I strongly suggest that that pointing to those papers would be useful. At the moment, there's no quantifiable reason - or evidence - to suggest that preload will be useful to developers. |
I have other data points around the efficacy of preload as a performance
primitive I could PR in or add to the original post. I'll defer to Your for
what he thinks makes the most sense here. Linking to the existing two
sources from his comment may be sufficient.
…On Oct 4, 2017 12:08 AM, "Terence Eden" ***@***.***> wrote:
I strongly suggest that that pointing to those papers would be useful. At
the moment, there's no quantifiable reason - or evidence - to suggest that
preload will be useful to developers.
—
You are receiving this because you were mentioned.
Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub
<#112 (comment)>, or mute
the thread
<https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AAGxaeVs6_oMIQT-LP8_4ZsqXaO9BRnfks5soy7xgaJpZM4PlcUS>
.
|
Paging Dr. @igrigorik for his opinion here - should we link from the spec to external resources which prove the feature's benefits? |
I believe we already provide the necessary context and motivation in the paragraphs above the quoted statement:
With respect to "preload use in the wild", I don't believe the spec is the right place to enumerate or maintain such a list — that's what developer documentation (e.g. MDN) resources are for. |
Can you quantify the performance penalty? How much faster is using preload?
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: