On Tue, May 7, 2013 at 4:01 PM, Anne van Kesteren <[email protected]> wrote: > On Tue, May 7, 2013 at 11:48 AM, Sam Tobin-Hochstadt <[email protected]> > wrote: >> On Tue, May 7, 2013 at 2:35 PM, Anne van Kesteren <[email protected]> wrote: >>> But you are treating them as URLs by default (with a small dose of magic). >> >> No. This is not what's happening at all. >> >> Modules are given logical names, such a "backbone" or "jquery/ui". >> Module loaders map logical names to URLs and then map the URLs to >> JavaScript source. >> >> The default behavior of the initial module loader for the browser is >> to convert a logical name to a URL in a certain way, and then to fetch >> that URL with http in the usual way to get JS source. > > How is that not treating it as a URL with a dose of magic by default? > E.g. import "http://code.jquery.com/jquery-1.9.1.min"; will work given > the way things are defined now. Similarly if I put jquery in root > import "/jquery-1.9.1.min" will always work, regardless of location. > This might not be how things are intended to be used, but I'd expect > to see this kind of usage.
Using an absolute URL (as in your first example) opts out of any processing. Otherwise it wouldn't work, of course -- adding the baseURL would break that URL. In the second case, what is the complain? That's a reasonable module name. >> The way we think that conversion should happen is to use the loader >> baseURL, which defaults to the document base URL, as a prefix, and >> ".js" as a suffix. Certainly we could choose other prefixes instead, >> but it doesn't sound like you think there's a clear better choice. >> We could also choose a different suffix, or no suffix, but it would be >> odd to force everyone to remove the extensions on their files. > > I think making them URLs (i.e. requiring import "/js/jquery.js") and > allowing people who want them to be something different to override > that with hooks is better. (Or with a new URL scheme as Kevin > suggests.) The whole point of my original email to Andreas is that this doesn't work. These names are *not* intended to specify where to find the resource. They *are* intended to be names that different modules can coordinate with. Should backbone put `import "/js/jquery.js"` in their source file? Sam _______________________________________________ es-discuss mailing list [email protected] https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss
