Build a useful investigation brief
Choose contrast files
Use a small file, a large file, an image with orientation metadata, and a format that follows a different preview path. Record dimensions, expected preview output, and selection time before starting each trace.
Align generation events
Capture selection, decode start and finish, thumbnail creation, metadata read, render, error, and ready-state updates. Mark repeated or absent events and compare visible pending text with the stage actually taking time.
Locate the first gap
Identify the earliest interval or repeated operation that explains the ready-time difference. Compare a second selection of the same file and a multi-file path, and state whether queuing or rendering remains a hypothesis without direct evidence.
What to carry forward
The investigation is sufficient when contrast files and aligned events identify the first meaningful generation gap and its effect on readiness. If only end-to-end timing is observable, report the delay boundary and avoid assigning it to decode or rendering without evidence.
Technical background: MDN reference.
Keep the decision with the work.
Use a Work Item in Aglet to record the problem, the evidence you have, and the next decision. Add an owner and priority, then keep updates in the discussion so the next person can follow the reasoning.
Create an account See the product workflow