Re: [w3ctag/design-reviews] Design Review: Speculation Rules (Prefetch) (Issue #721)

Hi,

@cynthia, @LeaVerou, and @hober took a look at this during our Tokyo F2F today.

We are sympathetic to the requirements this sets out to fulfill. The complexity of [document rules](https://github.com/WICG/nav-speculation/blob/main/triggers.md#document-rules) is concerning. While having solutions that can cover the whole spectrum of use-cases is nice, significant added complexity will have adverserial effects on adoption - and whenever possible we value [simpler solutions](https://w3ctag.github.io/design-principles/#simplicity) that an average developer could easily understand and make use of.

If you could propose a simpler approach that could cover say, [80% of the use cases](https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html/2007Aug/0495.html) as an alternative - we would love to see this. One example that came up in our discussion was an attribute on `<a>` elements instead of an entirely separate technology. After all, more complex approaches can always be added later, if the need arises.

One bit about eagerness - it would be useful to state (maybe not normatively?) that ideally implementations should provide  a way for the users to set their prefetch preferences, and user preferences should be treated as higher priority than the page-declared eagerness preference - in particular in low-data/bandwidth scenarios.


-- 
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
https://github.com/w3ctag/design-reviews/issues/721#issuecomment-1515732247
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.

Message ID: <w3ctag/design-reviews/issues/721/1515732247@github.com>