Repository navigation
Fix @import loading during table updates in Firefox - #1
Open
menshikovs wants to merge 1 commit into
Open
menshikovs wants to merge 1 commit into
menshikovs wants to merge 1 commit into
Conversation
This branch has not been deployed
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Summary
Fix an issue where CSS
@importrules can fail to load in Firefox during CSSV table updates.Problem
In Firefox 155, appending an import-bearing stylesheet to an inert
HTMLDocumentcan prevent an identical import from loading later in a connected Shadow DOM.This affects CSSV's in-place stylesheet update path.
Solution
@importat-rules before entering the detached-document style probe.Testing
The remaining Firefox failure concerns the existing
:lang()behavior across Shadow DOM boundaries ([Mozilla Bug 1579075](https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1579075)) and is unrelated to this change.No specification changes are required.