One more thing that little bit worries me, that the most common request when it
comes to CSP is banning inline scripts. If all the imports obey the CSP of the
master, which I think the only way to go, that also probably means that in most
cases we can only use imports those do not have any
I've already opened a bug that import removal is not clear to me
(https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=24003), but there
is more...
So in one way or another imports are cached per master documents
so if another link refers to the same import in the import tree it
does not have to be
The security objection to the original own CSP design was never fully
developed - I'm not sure it's necessarily a show-stopper.
Nick
Well, consider the case when we have the following import tree:
I1
| |
I2 I3
| |
I4
Respectively CSP1, CSP2, CSP3. CSP2 allows I4 to be loaded but
I've heard complains about the readability of the current import draft, and I
think the best way to improve it, if we all take some time and point out the
parts that could benefit from some polishing. Instead of filing a dozen of tiny
bugs, I just went through the spec. again and took some
During our last meeting we all seemed to agree on that defining/implementing
order for style-sheets is imports is super hard (if possible) and will bring
more
pain than it's worth for the web (aka. let's not make an already
over-complicated
system twice as complicated for very little benefits).
- Original Message -
From: Tab Atkins Jr. jackalm...@gmail.com
To: Gabor Krizsanits gkrizsan...@mozilla.com
Cc: Hajime Morrita morr...@google.com, public-webapps
public-webapps@w3.org
Sent: Monday, November 3, 2014 7:12:27 PM
Subject: Re: [Imports]: Styleshet cascading order
I think this part of the spec was largely written before ES6 class stuff
stabilized, fwiw. Which is not hard, since it's still not stabilized. ;)
Isn't there a chance to consider our use-case in ES6 spec. then?
Basically, ES6 is moving toward coupling allocation and
initialization but the
