New Readme for 0.50 #492
New Readme for 0.50 #492
Conversation
|
just added a further polyfill needed, for |
|
might be a good idea to disable travis on this branch for the moment |
|
|
||
| The final specification, though, only defines the [language-specific semantics of modules](http://www.ecma-international.org/ecma-262/6.0/#sec-modules), leaving implementations of the loading of those modules to separate specifications. The dynamic configurable loader is being specified at the [WhatWG loader spec](https://whatwg.github.io/loader/), and from version 0.50 this polyfill implements that. | ||
|
|
||
| Support for static loading of modules from HTML using `<script type="module">` tags has also been added to the [WhatWG HTML specification](https://html.spec.whatwg.org/multipage/scripting.html#the-script-element). This adapts the existing script-loading mechanism to include the loading of 'module scripts' together with all the other modules on which those module scripts depend. Unlike the WhatWG loader, however, this is not configurable, and has no connection with the loading pipeline defined there and implemented in this polyfill. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Unlike the WhatWG loader, however, this is not configurable, and has no connection with the loading pipeline defined there and implemented in this polyfill.
This isn't quite right. The point is for the WhatWG loader to share the same module registry as the <script type="module"> tag. And also for the WhatWG loader resolution hooks to affect the loading of the module tag as well. Perhaps @caridy can help confirm this.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Where have you seen the term module scripts used? Module tag is preferable I think.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
the HTML spec I link to refers to 'classic scripts' and 'module scripts'
|
Put the contributors in alpha sequence, which means G Bedford rightly comes at the top :-) |
|
👍 |
OK, here's my first stab at this, as discussed in #491. Comments of course welcome. I've removed all the links to other docs until these are (re)written, and all the usage examples until these actually work :-)
Not sure whether you want to keep the existing copyright; neither Luke nor Addy has contributed anything for years. 'Copyright contributors' perhaps?
It might be a good idea to mark 1.0 as deprecated - perhaps rename it too? - and change the master Readme to point to this branch rather than 1.0.