- From: Scott Miles <sjmiles@google.com>
- Date: Tue, 14 May 2013 14:26:29 -0700
- To: Simon Pieters <simonp@opera.com>
- Cc: Dimitri Glazkov <dglazkov@chromium.org>, public-webapps <public-webapps@w3.org>, Hajime Morrita <morrita@google.com>
- Message-ID: <CAHbmOLboGc9OLqm=Nyaw2qrGSvy9zd4uEXBdyjr_=K4mfJVOjg@mail.gmail.com>
It's not clear to me why <link rel="import"> can't be dynamic. As long as the previous document isn't somehow banished, I don't see the problem (admittedly, looking through a keyhole). On Tue, May 14, 2013 at 2:21 PM, Simon Pieters <simonp@opera.com> wrote: > On Tue, 14 May 2013 23:13:13 +0200, Dimitri Glazkov <dglazkov@chromium.org> > wrote: > > On Tue, May 14, 2013 at 2:08 PM, Simon Pieters <simonp@opera.com> wrote: >> >> I have proposed <script import=url></script> instead of <link rel=import >>> href=url> before. >>> >>> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/**Public/public-webapps/** >>> 2013AprJun/0009.html<http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-webapps/2013AprJun/0009.html> >>> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/**Public/public-webapps/** >>> 2013AprJun/0024.html<http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-webapps/2013AprJun/0024.html> >>> >>> Benefits: >>> >>> * Components can execute script from an external resource, which <script >>> src> can do as well, so that seems like a good fit in terms of security >>> policy and expectations in Web sites and browsers. >>> * <script src> is not dynamic, so making <script import> also not >>> dynamic >>> seems like a good fit. >>> * <script> can appear in <head> without making changes to the HTML >>> parser >>> (in contrast with a new element). >>> >>> To pre-empt confusion shown last time I suggested this: >>> >>> * This is not <script src>. >>> * This is not changing anything of the component itself. >>> >> >> Both <meta> and <script> somewhat fail the taste test for me. I am not >> objecting, just alerting of the weakness of stomach. >> >> <link rel="import"> has near-perfect semantics. It fails in the >> implementation specifics (the dynamic nature). >> >> Both <meta> and <script> are mis-declarations. An HTML Import is >> neither script nor metadata. >> > > That seems to be an argument based on aesthetics. That's worth > considering, of course, but I think is a relatively weak argument. In > particular I care about the first bullet point above. <link> is not capable > of executing script from an external resource today. What are the > implications if it suddenly gains that ability? > > > -- > Simon Pieters > Opera Software > >
Received on Tuesday, 14 May 2013 21:26:58 UTC