24003 2013-12-05 12:23:01 +0000 [Imports]: Element removed flag's behavior is not clear if multiple HTMLLinkElement refers to the same import 2014-02-07 18:14:51 +0000 1 1 1 Unclassified WebAppsWG HISTORICAL - Component Model unspecified PC All RESOLVED FIXED P2 normal --- 20683 1 gkrizsanits dglazkov bzbarsky morrita mrbkap public-webapps-bugzilla oldest_to_newest 97170 0 gkrizsanits 2013-12-05 12:23:01 +0000 It is not clear to me what should happen if multiple link elements in the same import tree refers to the same import, and only one of them is removed from the DOM tree for example. Shouldn't this flag be on the HTMLLinkElement instead of the import? Does it make sense to have such a flag on it at all? 99197 1 dglazkov 2014-01-27 20:45:09 +0000 Hmmm, good question. Morrita-san? 99461 2 morrita 2014-01-30 03:02:57 +0000 Right. The flag should be on <link> side. And the flag could have better name then. 99555 3 mrbkap 2014-01-31 23:18:35 +0000 (In reply to Morrita Hajime from comment #2) > Right. The flag should be on <link> side. > And the flag could have better name then. What is the flag attempting to accomplish? If we put it on the <link>, then couldn't we simply check if the link is in a document (i.e. currentDocument is non-null)? 99578 4 morrita 2014-02-02 05:53:07 +0000 The flag is one-way. Once it is set it isn't set again even after the node comes back into the document. The intention of the behaviour is to clarify the one-shot characteristics of imports. We might want to revise that policy if we have better model here. 99582 5 gkrizsanits 2014-02-02 16:45:55 +0000 (In reply to Morrita Hajime from comment #4) > The intention of the behaviour is to clarify the one-shot characteristics > of imports. We might want to revise that policy if we have better model here. I'm not sure I fully understand this. So the idea is that even though we do not remove the import document from the cache/manager when the referring link element is removed from the tree, when we put it back it will not work? What's the purpose of this behaviour? 99623 6 morrita 2014-02-03 18:16:25 +0000 (In reply to Gabor Krizsanits from comment #5) > (In reply to Morrita Hajime from comment #4) > > The intention of the behaviour is to clarify the one-shot characteristics > > of imports. We might want to revise that policy if we have better model here. > > I'm not sure I fully understand this. So the idea is that even though we do > not remove the import document from the cache/manager when the referring > link element is removed from the tree, when we put it back it will not work? > What's the purpose of this behaviour? I'm sorry to be unclear. I don't think we should remove the document from the manager. The manager thing was out of consideration when the section was written. Thinking more about that, I'm now inclining to get rid of the flag thing. I need to think about that a bit more how to spec it out though. 99875 7 morrita 2014-02-06 00:54:43 +0000 Trying to clarify the point. Now the flag is gone. https://github.com/w3c/webcomponents/commit/3170e1c8e7bd7133da4131c766aa27dc0cc42638 https://github.com/w3c/webcomponents/commit/3170e1c8e7bd7133da4131c766aa27dc0cc42638 Closing for now. Feel free to reopen or file another bug to continue conversation. 99876 8 morrita 2014-02-06 00:56:27 +0000 Wrong link :-( https://github.com/w3c/webcomponents/commit/3170e1c8e7bd7133da4131c766aa27dc0cc42638 https://github.com/w3c/webcomponents/commit/0f3a97e9ada3619c2a5e5287f2f34258a3e39e85