21229 2013-03-09 00:16:02 +0000 [Imports]: Imports should fetch and process some external resources 2013-09-18 19:47:03 +0000 1 1 1 Unclassified WebAppsWG HISTORICAL - Component Model unspecified PC Windows NT RESOLVED DUPLICATE 23170 P2 normal --- 20683 1 sjmiles dglazkov dominicc ian public-webapps-bugzilla oldest_to_newest 84154 0 sjmiles 2013-03-09 00:16:02 +0000 We have straw version of this loader that allows construction like this: web-component.html: <script src="one.js"></script> <link rel="component" href="two.html"> <element name="three"> ... </element> <link rel="component" href="four.html"> <script src="five.js"></script> <element name="six"> ... </element> Ideally the contract is that the script tags are live (executed in main window context), and that each of these things is processed in order. As in the example, 'one.js' must be processed before 'two.html', and so on. 84155 1 sjmiles 2013-03-09 00:17:40 +0000 I forgot to mention that all paths are intended to be relative to the url of the linked component document itself, but I believe that's already in the spec. 85077 2 dominicc 2013-03-28 05:06:08 +0000 It seems odd to permit external scripts but not inline scripts. 85083 3 sjmiles 2013-03-28 07:50:03 +0000 I agree. I didn't include it my example, but fwiw our polyfill evaluates inline scripts also. 90996 4 dglazkov 2013-07-19 17:31:02 +0000 What about other resources? I guess this depends on understanding what exactly does including a <link rel=stylesheet> or <img src> (or <frame srd>) in an import mean. 91023 5 sjmiles 2013-07-19 22:36:10 +0000 We use the following rules: >> <link rel=stylesheet> applied as if it was in the main document >> <img src> inert >> <iframe src>) inert 91026 6 dglazkov 2013-07-19 22:47:46 +0000 Do you need to keep things that are inert in the document? Ian had an idea today that we introduce a new insertion mode in HTML parser that simply throws away everything that isn't relevant in an import document. 91027 7 sjmiles 2013-07-19 22:49:59 +0000 IMO, the expectation is that those nodes are available for manual transplantation into the main document. 91028 8 dglazkov 2013-07-19 22:56:44 +0000 (In reply to comment #7) > IMO, the expectation is that those nodes are available for manual > transplantation into the main document. So it's okay if the relative URLs in these elements will be messed up when you move them into main documents? This is the way it works now when you move an element from one doc to another. 91029 9 dglazkov 2013-07-19 23:04:30 +0000 (In reply to comment #7) > IMO, the expectation is that those nodes are available for manual > transplantation into the main document. Another thought: can we not just let the authors put these into a template on the imported document? 93526 10 dglazkov 2013-09-18 19:47:03 +0000 *** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of bug 23170 ***