The 44 controls / TS34
TS34 · Performance and monitoring
Field Core Web Vitals are documented and classified at the 75th percentile.
Protocol wording · 0.1.0-draft.28 · Documentation view; no website assessment.
Control rule version : 0.1.0-draft.28
Reading guide: start with applicability and required evidence, then read expectations together with their limitations. Understand C, NC, NT and NA outcomes · Prepare a dossier
Expectations and evidence
- Required inputs (protocol identifiers)
- field-data, intent
- When it applies
- Cohorts with relevant field data.
- How to check
- Use an identified field source: CrUX, Search Console or RUM. Record period, device, granularity and population; do not conflate URL and origin.
- Expectation
- Source, period, granularity, device and LCP/INP/CLS p75 are recorded and classified against cited thresholds; poor values remain visible and inform a decision.
- Evidence to retain
- LCP ≤ 2.5 s, INP ≤ 200 ms and CLS ≤ 0.1 at the 75th percentile for a Good assessment.
- Non-applicability
- Flows explicitly outside CWV scope; missing data alone means NT.
- Limitations
- Missing CrUX data does not mean the page is fast.
- Outcome clarification
- C requires all expectations across the declared scope. NC requires evidenced contradiction; otherwise NT. NA requires evidence of non-applicability.
- Reference scope
- Technical reference; the TSEP acceptance rule remains an editorial proposal.
Atomic rules
TS34-A01 — Attributable field cohort
- Required inputs (protocol identifiers)
- field-data, intent
- When it applies
- Declared performance scope for this control and qualified reading profile.
- How to check
- Identify source, request/returned key, URL/origin, device, period and population under performance-evidence-v1. No implicit scope fallback.
- Expectation
- Cohort matches the plan with retained dates/provenance. Explicit lab-for-field substitution fails; a different or old cohort remains inconclusive.
- Evidence to retain
- Original JSON with source/date/hash; plan and supplied review when required, diagnostics and limits under docs/performance-evidence.md.
- Assumptions
- Supplied data/reviews are not authenticated. Plan precedes assessment and lab runs; a historical cohort is not preregistration.
- Inconclusive outcome
- Insufficient source/plan/dates/measures; unsupported format/profile, scope mismatch, exceeded bounds or missing review under the contract. Absence never becomes C or NA.
- Non-applicability
- No automatic atomic exemption; whole-control non-applicability requires its own evidence.
- Limitations
- C describes documentation, not good performance. No display/ranking, demonstrated cause, automatic human review or global conformity. Replay performs no new measurement.
TS34-A02 — Retained p75 measurements and classes
- Required inputs (protocol identifiers)
- field-data, intent
- When it applies
- Declared performance scope for this control and qualified reading profile.
- How to check
- Read LCP/INP/CLS p75 in native units and compare exactly with cited thresholds, without relabeling FID/TBT. Retain poor values and unknowns.
- Expectation
- All three measures are classified correctly. A bound classification contradicting p75 fails; correctly documented poor performance passes.
- Evidence to retain
- Original JSON with source/date/hash; plan and supplied review when required, diagnostics and limits under docs/performance-evidence.md.
- Assumptions
- Supplied data/reviews are not authenticated. Plan precedes assessment and lab runs; a historical cohort is not preregistration.
- Inconclusive outcome
- Insufficient source/plan/dates/measures; unsupported format/profile, scope mismatch, exceeded bounds or missing review under the contract. Absence never becomes C or NA.
- Non-applicability
- No automatic atomic exemption; whole-control non-applicability requires its own evidence.
- Limitations
- C describes documentation, not good performance. No display/ranking, demonstrated cause, automatic human review or global conformity. Replay performs no new measurement.
TS34-A03 — Reasoned decision bound to measurements
- Required inputs (protocol identifiers)
- field-data, intent
- When it applies
- Declared performance scope for this control and qualified reading profile.
- How to check
- Retain supplied review, author, provenance, date, source hash and decision for each metric; verify binding without fabricating judgment.
- Expectation
- Each metric retains its class, reason and action. A contradictory class fails. Missing/incomplete/unbound review is inconclusive.
- Evidence to retain
- Original JSON with source/date/hash; plan and supplied review when required, diagnostics and limits under docs/performance-evidence.md.
- Assumptions
- Supplied data/reviews are not authenticated. Plan precedes assessment and lab runs; a historical cohort is not preregistration.
- Inconclusive outcome
- Insufficient source/plan/dates/measures; unsupported format/profile, scope mismatch, exceeded bounds or missing review under the contract. Absence never becomes C or NA.
- Non-applicability
- No automatic atomic exemption; whole-control non-applicability requires its own evidence.
- Limitations
- C describes documentation, not good performance. No display/ranking, demonstrated cause, automatic human review or global conformity. Replay performs no new measurement.