It's not in the list here https://mozilla.github.io/standards-positions/ https://mozilla.github.io/standards-positions/ and the spec (https://wicg.github.io/por

It's not in the list here https://mozilla.github.io/standards-positions/ https://mozilla.github.io/standards-positions/ and the spec (https://wicg.github.io/portals/#the-portal-element https://wicg.github.io/portals/#the-portal-element) is written solely by folks at Google and doesn't appear to be an actual W3C spec. Why should anybody care about this until it's standardised and implemented by more than one browser vendor? To talk of a browser vendor "launching" a new element is also ridiculous - Google have no authority to "launch" an element for the web as if it were some product they decided to update. Article title is poor in this respect. Looking at the actual spec: > This specification extends [HTML] to define a new kind of top-level browsing context, which can be embedded in another document, and a mechanism for replacing the contents of another top-level browsing context with the previously embedded context. 1) Why not an iframe? 2) Why not a link to the iframe src? Or is the link here from within the iframe? Surely that's possible already with a postMessage and a window.location change. I don't understand the benefits here. Is the sole purpose of this to avoid a HTTP request?