Skip to main content

The Uselessness of HTML Imports

It is the opinion of this developer that HTML Imports, championed by the Polymer Project and already implemented in the Blink fork of WebKit, are utterly and completely useless.
Beyond this base uselessness, I believe HTML Imports are actively and wildly harmful. I believe the more they are used, the more problems they’re going to cause.

The Case For HTML Imports

Giving the new feature their fair shot, I’ll lay out the case in favor of HTML Imports. I was actually pretty excited about them when I first read the details, and even when I first started using them.
Unique loading of resources without double loading, such as when two imports each themselves import a shared dependency. is really cool! We’re building pretty complicated JS loading systems to solve what, here, is a built-in feature.
The collection of scripts, markup, and styles associated with single units of behavior is really great as a way to conceptualize of how you’re pulling in these web components. It just makes sense to pull in the idea of “Tabbed Pane” and get with it the mark up, behaviors, and default styling for panes of content with tabs to switch between them. No more making sure you have the right scrpt and link tags to match on top of making sure all the places you use the related mark up are correct.

The Case For Not Caring About HTML Imports

You’re already loading Javascript and CSS just fine. Honestly, is it that difficult to include a script and link tag pair? Sure I complained about it above, but let’s be honest, these are small things to complain about.
You already have template loaders if you’re doing any kind of client-side rendering, so HTML imports seem to solve a problem you already have solved. The catch being, they don’t actually solve them because HTML Imports load the documents without actually doing anything with them.

The Case Actively Against HTML Imports

Combining HTML, CSS, and JS into single files isn’t fun to edit or syntax highlight. If you don’t want to hate your editor, your HTML Imports are going to end up being only HTML and they’ll still just use script and link tags to pull in the related JS and CSS.
By introducing these assets externally to keep your sanity, the already asynchronous HTML imports are going to also be waiting on these other assets, and tracking the readiness of these imports gets even more difficult than asset readiness for HTML Imports on their own or CSS/JS loading on their own.
Breaks the value gained from CSS/JS minifiers and preprocessors, because if you’re housing all of these in HTML Imports you aren’t combining them. I’ve seen some proposals that our pipelines learn to extract and combine the JS and CSS from our dependency trees of imports. At that point, what’s the point of HTML imports?
And of course, this increases the number of HTTP requests without clear ways to combine as we would CSS and JS files.

The Case Needed For HTML Imports

Frankly, at this point, I wonder why HTML Imports were introduced at all. What is this really gaining us? What problem did the HTML Import solve? It is really hard to gauge a solution when the problem it aims to help with isn’t even clear in the first place.
If you have an understanding of them that clarifies or counters any of this, please let me know.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Respect and Code Reviews

Code Reviews in a development team only function best, or possible at all, when everyone approaches them with respect. That’s something I’ve usually taken for granted because I’ve had the opportunity to work with amazing developers who shine not just in their technical skills but in their interpersonal skills on a team. That isn’t always the case, so I’m going to put into words something that often exists just in assumptions.
You have to respect your code. This is first only because the nature and intent of code reviews are to safeguard the quality of your code, so even having code reviews demonstrates a baseline of respect for that code. But, maybe not everyone on the team has the same level of respect or entered a team with existing review traditions that they aren’t acquainted with.
There can be culture shock when you enter a team that’s really heavy on code reviews, but also if you enter a team or interact with a colleague who doesn’t share that level of respect for the process or…

CARDIAC: The Cardboard Computer

I am just so excited about this.


CARDIAC. The Cardboard Computer. How cool is that? This piece of history is amazing and better than that: it is extremely accessible. This fantastic design was built in 1969 by David Hagelbarger at Bell Labs to explain what computers were to those who would otherwise have no exposure to them. Miraculously, the CARDIAC (CARDboard Interactive Aid to Computation) was able to actually function as a slow and rudimentary computer. 
One of the most fascinating aspects of this gem is that at the time of its publication the scope it was able to demonstrate was actually useful in explaining what a computer was. Could you imagine trying to explain computers today with anything close to the CARDIAC?

It had 100 memory locations and only ten instructions. The memory held signed 3-digit numbers (-999 through 999) and instructions could be encoded such that the first digit was the instruction and the second two digits were the address of memory to operate on. The only re…

How To Care If BSD, MIT, or GPL Licenses Are Used

The two recent posts about some individuals' choice of GPL versus others' preference for BSD and MIT style licensing has caused a lot of debate and response. I've seen everything as an interesting combination of very important topics being taken far too seriously and far too personally. All involved need to take a few steps back.

For the uninitiated and as a clarifier for the initiated, we're dealing with (basically) three categories of licensing when someone releases software (and/or its code):
Closed Source. Easiest to explain, because you just get nothing.GPL. If you get the software, you get the source code, you get to change it, and anything you combine it with must be under the same terms.MIT and BSD. If you get the software, you might get the source code, you get to change it, and you have no obligations about anything else you combine it with.The situation gets stickier when we look at those combinations and the transitions between them.

Use GPL code with Closed S…