Re: [w3c/webcomponents] Make JavaScript Files a Valid Entry Point to a Web Page (#807)

> The difference is obvious. That's an html file. A static html file shouldn't be require to load a client-side javascript file that dynamically generates an html document; it is fundamentally unnecessary other than the fact that current standards require it.

A web server could be configured to transform JS files into what @WebReflection wrote whilst streaming the response. It's effectively just boilerplate.

You could potentially have the browser do the same work (just create the minimal DOM and execute the script), but what's the benefit other than avoiding a small amount of boilerplate? The drawbacks seem to outweigh that, in my opinion. For example, it encourages bad accessibility practices of not having fallback HTML, and you can't take advantage of progressive rendering of HTML (because the JS has to be fully loaded, then parsed, then executed).

-- 
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
https://github.com/w3c/webcomponents/issues/807#issuecomment-486283684