RE: [Imports] Considering imperative HTML imports?

• From: Travis Leithead <travis.leithead@microsoft.com>
• Date: Thu, 16 Apr 2015 19:36:16 +0000
• To: Boris Zbarsky <bzbarsky@mit.edu>, "public-webapps@w3.org" <public-webapps@w3.org>
• Message-ID: <BLUPR03MB389253D54FE572BCF56E9E3F8E40@BLUPR03MB389.namprd03.prod.outlook.com>

Oh! XHR slipped my mind. It would be identical :) (Though perhaps a tiny-bit easier to use.)

-----Original Message-----
From: Boris Zbarsky [mailto:bzbarsky@mit.edu] 
Sent: Thursday, April 16, 2015 11:30 AM
To: public-webapps@w3.org
Subject: Re: [Imports] Considering imperative HTML imports?

On 4/16/15 12:37 AM, Travis Leithead wrote:
> Was an imperative form of HTML imports already considered? E.g., the 
> following springs to mind:
>
>    Promise<Document> importDocument(DOMString url);

How is this different from a promise-ified version of XHR, exactly? 
(Not that there's anything wrong with that; just trying to understand the proposal.)

-Boris

Received on Thursday, 16 April 2015 19:36:44 UTC