Add preload link type #1418
Add preload link type #1418
Conversation
| <td><code data-x="rel-preload">preload</code></td> | ||
| <td><span data-x="external resource link">External Resource</span></td> | ||
| <td><em>not allowed</em></td> | ||
| <td class="yes"> Yes </td> |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Could you clarify what "for current navigation" and "according to specified destination and priority" mean?
It's notable that these are the only phrases in the spec that seem to distinguish preload from prefetch, so it'd be worthwhile to be clear about them.
|
What is the status of implementer interest in this rel? Specifically, is it implemented or are there active plans for implementation in 2+ engines? |
|
Thanks for the comments. I'll fix things up and clarify the differences with Firefox have an open bug marked as Priority 2 enhancement, and MS Edge marked the feature as likely to be implemented in the future. |
|
Review comments (hopefully) addressed. PTAL |
|
I'll defer editorial knits to @domenic, but otherwise lgtm! |
|
Shouldn't this also add the |
Yeah I think it should. Either that or we should have an accompanying PR for adding it. If so I’d be happy to volunteer to write a separate one up for that if needed—but equally happy to just help review it if it gets added here or in another PR |
|
LGTM for purposes of what I need as far as adding support for |
| <p>The <code data-x="rel-prefetch">prefetch</code> keyword indicates that preemptively fetching and | ||
| caching the specified resource is likely to be beneficial, as it is highly likely that the user | ||
| will require this resource. <span w-nodev>User agents must implement the processing model of the | ||
| will require this resource for future navigations. <span w-nodev>User agents must implement the processing model of the |
|
I'll fix the line wrapping and merge this myself. A follow-up PR adding in the |
|
I was about to land this, but I had a question: I never got clarification on what "according to the specified destination and priority" means. I can guess that maybe "specified destination" is related to the missing |
|
I added links to the definition of destination and priority in fetch. The specified destination is indeed related to If you wish I could add |
|
Ah OK. I can merge this without adding |
|
OK, cool
|
|
Merged as d013cd1; woohoo! Thanks so much for adding this. It's really great for both authors and implementers to have these definitions centralized. |
|
I went ahead and created #1449 for the |
5 participants
This adds
preloadas a body-ok, link-enabled link type. I mostly followed @domenic's pattern from the addition of the various resource hints link types, but let me know if I'm doing it wrong, or if you think this is a bad idea./cc @igrigorik