[Bug 22305] [imports]: Imports should be represented as Documents, not DocumentFragments.

https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=22305

Morrita Hajime <morrita@google.com> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
             Status|REOPENED                    |RESOLVED
         Resolution|---                         |FIXED

--- Comment #13 from Morrita Hajime <morrita@google.com> ---
After trying some prototyping in Blink, I found that there would be so many
unanswered questions and we would bring another set of magic if we choose
DocumentFragment - URL resolution, another tree participation state than
in-document and out-document, ownership of the fragment, parsing, etc. I guess
we'll find more as we move forward.

So I'd like to stick Document. It has some problems like encoding and quirks
mode, but we've learned about that and the level of understanding is much
higher than another path. Also we don't hear any complaint about
import-as-document. Even though there are some theoretical inconsistency,
Document seems fitting well to developer's mental model. 

Caveat: Although I don't see anything bad, theoretically it is possible to find
some fundamental flaw of Document-as-import that forces us to switch to
DocumentFragment again. That'd be a disaster for all of us. I'll add
document.currentImport so that web developer doesn't have to rely on
document.currentScript.ownerDocument which unnecessarily assumes that the
import is a document.

Closing this for now. Import is going to be Document, as current spec and the
bug title says.

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are the QA Contact for the bug.

Received on Friday, 4 April 2014 21:36:37 UTC