Skip to content

javascript.operators.import - misleading (incorrect?) compatibility info or Firefox regression re. import() of CSS #28616

@sgbeal

Description

@sgbeal

What type of issue is this?

Incorrect support data (example: BrowserX says "86" but support was added in "40")

What information was incorrect, unhelpful, or incomplete?

According to the compatibility chart, Firefox 138+ supports:

const foo = await import("./foo.css", with:{type:"css"});

That may well once have been, but v145.0 fails that with:

 TypeError: ...foo.css: invalid module type

whereas Chrome 142 dutifully produces the documented results.

Whether this is misinformation in the table or a FF regression is a judgement i must defer to the doc's maintainers.

Upon a fourth reading: the chart is somewhat misleading/ambiguous here. It claims that FF supports the options argument to import(), but also makes no claim of which option(s) is/are supported. It implies, via the "full support" checkbox, that all documented options are supported, in any case, though it admittedly does not say so outright.

What browsers does this problem apply to, if applicable?

No response

What did you expect to see?

i was hoping that my local FF v145 would conform to the compatibility chart.

Did you test this? If so, how?

See code snippet above.

Can you link to any release notes, bugs, pull requests, or MDN pages related to this?

No response

Do you have anything more you want to share?

No response

MDN URL

https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Web/JavaScript/Reference/Operators/import

MDN metadata

MDN page report details
  • Query: javascript.operators.import
  • Report started: 2025-12-08T21:08:11.422Z

Metadata

Metadata

Assignees

No one assigned

    Labels

    needs triageThis issue needs to be confirmed

    Type

    No type

    Projects

    No projects

    Milestone

    No milestone

    Relationships

    None yet

    Development

    No branches or pull requests

    Issue actions