Re: [Imports] Considering imperative HTML imports?

Imports bug tree:
https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/showdependencytree.cgi?id=20683&hide_resolved=1

On Thu, Apr 16, 2015 at 7:27 AM, Dimitri Glazkov <dglazkov@google.com>
wrote:

> https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=25319
>
> On Thu, Apr 16, 2015 at 12:55 AM, Elliott Sprehn <esprehn@chromium.org>
> wrote:
>
>>
>>
>> On Wed, Apr 15, 2015 at 9:37 PM, Travis Leithead <
>> travis.leithead@microsoft.com> wrote:
>>
>>>  Was an imperative form of HTML imports already considered? E.g., the
>>> following springs to mind:
>>>
>>>   Promise<Document> importDocument(DOMString url);
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> I was thinking about Worker’s importScripts(DOMString… urls), and the
>>> above seems like a nice related corollary.
>>>
>>
>> We did consider this, I think there's still a proposal for an imperative
>> document.import(url) => Promise API. The major advantage of the declarative
>> approach is that the browser can fetch the entire import tree and even
>> start tokenizing on a background thread without ever running any script.
>>
>> - E
>>
>
>