declarative-partial-updates

You might be interested in https://github.com/WICG/declarative-partial-updates

https://groups.google.com/a/chromium.org/g/blink-dev/c/rjBSVWAGoHo/m/FhEGrTIkAwAJ?… "Declaratively control various aspect of HTML fragments:" - Sanitize them - Bring them from a separate URL (aka "client side include") - Buffer them instead of stream There's an "explainer" doc about how it would work here: https://github.com/WICG/declarative-partial-updates/blob/main/fragment-include-exp…

As far as I can tell, this is not actually allowed by the current proposal. The definition of the "find markers" algorithm in https://github.com/whatwg/html/pull/11818 requires that the <?end> marker be a sibling of the <?start> marker in the DOM, so they can't have different parents like this. Well, you're allowed to write it, but the browser will just ignore the <?end> marker. The range will end at the </em> tag, the same place https://github.com/WICG/declarative-partial-updates/blob/mai... says it goes by default if you don't write the <?end> at all. (That default wouldn't make a ton of sense if patch ranges were allowed to break out of their parent elements like this.) Jake Archibald thinks it'd be cool to use a similar syntax to do CSS highlights, but there are other problems with that (like not being able to create overlapping range

Declarative partial updating "sets the stage for client-side includes." https://github.com/WICG/declarative-partial-updates The linked article suggests a potential syntax: <template for="footer" patchsrc="/partials/footer.html"> That would transclude the content of /partials/footer.html in your HTML. But the road ahead for this is still quite bumpy. Here's a good video from a year ago, talking through the obstacles. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t0NBcve0enY

The WICG explainers do a somewhat better job than this article. https://github.com/WICG/declarative-partial-updates https://github.com/WICG/declarative-partial-updates/blob/mai...