On Wednesday, March 6, 2024 at 6:53:40 PM UTC Reilly Grant wrote:
In https://github.com/w3c/compute-pressure/issues/14 an engineer from Zoom expressed interest in this feature. Do you know if Zoom or any of the other developers mentioned in the TAG review <https://github.com/w3ctag/design-reviews/issues/795#issuecomment-1691188175> have deployed an experiment using this Origin Trial and if so have they been able to confirm the expected improvement? Here at Whereby, we’ve been experimenting with this Origin Trial and have found it to be valuable. - We’ve been logging occurrences of high CPU pressure (powered by the OT) during Whereby calls in our internal meeting analysis tools, and have found there is a correlation between these events and perceived media quality (audio/video quality drops, etc.). As a result, we plan to surface these CPU spikes in our external customers’ session insights timelines as well, as they are useful context to have when diagnosing particular issues. - We’re close to releasing a new feature: a "meeting diagnostics" panel that displays real-time CPU usage (powered by the OT), along with video and audio transmission quality, during sessions. This tool aims to enable participants to take the appropriate action to maintain audio quality, such as opting for audio-only mode. In a next phase, we aim to develop an algorithm that combines these CPU/audio/video inputs, so as to automatically select the most suitable communication mode. We are keen to see the Compute Pressure API ship! Best, Andreas WebKit's position expresses skepticism that applications responding to these signals will actually result in an overall improvement in user experience. I would like to see feedback from the developers who have tested this API disproving that position. The OT survey responses that developers will continue to use the API is an indirect signal that that is true but it would be much more convincing to have direct evidence. Reilly Grant | Software Engineer | rei...@chromium.org | Google Chrome <https://www.google.com/chrome> On Wed, Mar 6, 2024 at 8:31 AM Ajay Rahatekar <ajayra...@google.com> wrote: Please see below for aggregated and manually vetted OT feedback that was shared as per Google's policy: - 100% of the respondents are extremely likely to continue using the API. - 43% of the respondents found the API 'Extremely easy', 43% found it 'Neither easy nor difficult' and 14% found it 'Moderately easy' to use. - 7% of the respondents mentioned that they would prefer to give the callback frequency in time units (secs, milliseconds), similar to other APIs such as setInterval in place of Hz as currently designed. A number scale along with labels would be more useful e.g. { pressure: 2, label: 'nominal' }. - 2% of the respondents suggested adjusting thresholds or combining states to reduce "flapping" between fair and nominal -Ajay On Wednesday, March 6, 2024 at 7:22:39 AM UTC-8 yoav...@chromium.org wrote: On Wed, Mar 6, 2024 at 4:00 PM 'Ajay Rahatekar' via blink-dev < blin...@chromium.org> wrote: As Kenneth mentioned, the aggregated/anonymized feedback (largely positive) was shared with the Intel team in consultation with the Google Privacy team. Internal copy is available as needed. While a Google-internal copy is great, a public summary of that feedback would be useful for non-Google API owners and the broader community alike, and help us get a better understanding of the benefits of shipping this. On Wednesday, March 6, 2024 at 5:57:47 AM UTC-8 kenneth.ch...@gmail.com wrote: On Tue, Mar 5, 2024 at 7:14 PM Reilly Grant <rei...@chromium.org> wrote: On Tue, Mar 5, 2024 at 5:56 AM Mike Taylor <mike...@chromium.org> wrote: During this origin trial we realized that the full capacity of the API couldn’t be tested due to a lack of support for third-party tokens. An Origin Trial extension <https://groups.google.com/a/chromium.org/g/blink-dev/c/s83S7wXxa6E/m/AjvsIJxmAQAJ> was necessary until M123. Is there any developer feedback that can be shared from the origin trials? I'm looking for signals that developers have been able to improve user experiences by using the new signals. Though we cannot share the exact feedback from the origin trial due to confidentiality (we also only got a summary ourselves as non-Googlers), the feedback was quite positive with all respondents extremely likely to continue using the API. None of the respondents found the API hard to use, but we received some minor feedback on the API shape and feature requests that we have adopted or at least filed issues for. Ajay (cc'ed), might be able to share more. Kenneth -- 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 blink-dev+...@chromium.org. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/a/chromium.org/d/msgid/blink-dev/143ee50c-9ff4-4dfb-860c-700155bcd065n%40chromium.org <https://groups.google.com/a/chromium.org/d/msgid/blink-dev/143ee50c-9ff4-4dfb-860c-700155bcd065n%40chromium.org?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 blink-dev+unsubscr...@chromium.org. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/a/chromium.org/d/msgid/blink-dev/2b4b71c3-a02c-41a1-a229-b15b66d5393en%40chromium.org.
