Does "load an HTML document" miss respecting the navigation param's response's body?

[mbrodesser-Igalia]

What is the issue with the HTML Standard?

¹ invokes ². The latter ignores navigation param's response's body.

This is relevant because ³ invokes ¹ and sets the response's body in step 11 and populates the navigation params in step 11 with it.

Footnotes

1. https://html.spec.whatwg.org/multipage/document-lifecycle.html#navigate-html ↩ ↩²

2. https://html.spec.whatwg.org/multipage/document-lifecycle.html#initialise-the-document-object ↩

3. https://html.spec.whatwg.org/multipage/browsing-the-web.html#evaluate-a-javascript:-url ↩

[domenic]

1 invokes 2. The latter ignores navigation param's response's body.

This is intentional. The body is consumed by step 3 of [1]. [2] is only about Document creation; there's no law saying that we must populate during the same algorithm as we create.

#8095 discusses making step 3 more rigorous, but I don't think there's any issue here.

I'll close this, but am happy to reopen it if I've misunderstood what you're getting at.

[mbrodesser-Igalia]

1 invokes 2. The latter ignores navigation param's response's body.

This is intentional. The body is consumed by step 3 of [1].

Is it? navigationParam's response is only used to process link headers. The navigationParam's response's body would have to be accessed somewhere and that seems to not happen.

[2] is only about Document creation; there's no law saying that we must populate during the same algorithm as we create.

#8095 discusses making step 3 more rigorous, but I don't think there's any issue here.

I'll close this, but am happy to reopen it if I've misunderstood what you're getting at.