#405: CSS Modules

Visit on Github.

Opened Aug 8, 2019

こんにちはTAG!

I'm requesting a TAG review of:

Further details:

  • Relevant time constraints or deadlines: None, though we're ready to move forward with an implementation in Blink.
  • I have read and filled out the Self-Review Questionnare on Security and Privacy. There are no new security/privacy concerns, as this proposal follows JavaScript/JSON modules with respect to the usage of fetch.
  • I have reviewed the TAG's API Design Principles

You should also know that...

Much of the discussion regarding this feature thus far has taken place on this issue thread, also linked above: https://github.com/WICG/webcomponents/issues/759

We'd prefer the TAG provide feedback as (please select one):

  • open issues in our GitHub repo for each point of feedback
  • open a single issue in our GitHub repo for the entire review
  • [ x ] leave review feedback as a comment in this issue and @-notify @dandclark

Please preview the issue and check that the links work before submitting. In particular, if anything links to a URL which requires authentication (e.g. Google document), please make sure anyone with the link can access the document.

¹ For background, see our explanation of how to write a good explainer.

Discussions

2019-10-02

Minutes

Ken: Nothing much on our feedback; at TPAC some feedback on security issues...

Tess: I raised this in the web components meeting. ... import foo from whatever.css. No indication that the author knows that it's CSS, may not be expecting it to execute. Coordination problem as server may decide to serve some JS instead and that may execute. ... Came up in the context of JSON modules. Common to load things cross-origin, eg. a weather widget. Fetch JSON, then parse it, so you know it won't be executed. JSON modules may be immediately executed. ... Server controls what is served, so it's not under the author's control. ... Advocating for a change to import ... some kind of special syntax. That is being pursued.

Ken: Could you add a link to that discussion into our issue?

Tess: I will dig up the minutes from the web components meeting at TPAC, and the associated issue and PR on HTML removing JSON modules.

Peter: I see the concerns David raised about ... did we get any feedback on that?

David: No, no feedback on that. Felt a little weird to defer... they were waiting on a decision.

Kenneth: Should also mention that they are changing the name because there is a popular module... will be called CSS Module scripts potentially.

Peter: What should we do on this issue? Wait for things to shake out at ECMAScript? Anything else?

Kenneth: Not much we can do at this point.

Peter: Should we set this to pnding external feedback and come back to it? Ok. Will do.

2020-01-27

Minutes

[possibly can close based on latest feedback]

2020-03-16

Minutes

David: filed an issue yesterday and we should probably wait for this or close and not wait?

Dan: should we trust the web components progress?

Tess: there is a vf2f on web components and I'll make sure to bring it there.

Dan: keep it but assign for the week after?

Tess: ye

2020-04-06

Minutes

Tess: we were leaving this open to track where it went - we should keep it open.

Rossen that sounds right. I chatted with Dan Clark who was engaged on the review and he was in the same position.

[bumped a few weeks

2020-04-20

Minutes

(trying to understand state of issue)

(Discussion around whether we should close it, as the right people are on the remaining issues - proposed closed)

Peter/Yves/Ken (discussions around adding tracking labels on the external issues)