W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-webapps@w3.org > January to March 2014

Re: [HTML Imports]: Sync, async, -ish?

From: Brian Kardell <bkardell@gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 29 Jan 2014 12:19:21 -0500
Message-ID: <CADC=+jer9Xa_gj=jUYnO1URyws6eKLVtoN=WGgHTap9i22J-jw@mail.gmail.com>
To: Jake Archibald <jaffathecake@gmail.com>
Cc: "public-webapps@w3.org" <public-webapps@w3.org>
On Wed, Jan 29, 2014 at 12:09 PM, Jake Archibald <jaffathecake@gmail.com>wrote:

> :unresolved { display: none; } plus "lazyload" (
> https://dvcs.w3.org/hg/webperf/raw-file/tip/specs/ResourcePriorities/Overview.html#attr-lazyload)
> would allow devs to create the non-blocking behaviour. But this is the
> wrong way around. Devs should have to opt-in to the slow thing and get the
> fast thing by default.
>
>
Isn't that what I suggested?  I suggested that it be asyc, just as you said
- and that all we do is add the ability to use the :unresolved pseudo class
on the body.  This provides authors as a simple means of control for opting
out of rendering in blocks above the level of the component without
resorting to the need to do it via script or a root level element which
serves no other real purpose. This level of ability seems not just simpler,
but probably more desirable - like a lot of authors I've done a lot of work
with things that pop into existence and cause relayout -- often the thing I
want to block or reserve space for isn't the specific content, but a
container or something.  Seems to me with addition of a body level
:unresolved you could answer pretty much any use case for partial rendering
from "just dont do it" all the way to "screw it, the thing pops into
existence" (the later being the default) very very simply - and at the
right layer (CSS).
Received on Wednesday, 29 January 2014 17:19:49 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 18:14:21 UTC