Re: [w3c/webcomponents] Alternative proposal for closed shadow DOM (#499)

Matthaw,

I do not want this to become our own discussion, but I'll try to respond 
one more time, hoping to make this point, ultimately it's up to others 
to decide

1/again, we have never been able to do what we wanted on the page, 
internals of user-agent own elements have always been hidden from us, no 
difference here.
2/ having object being just a container for methods and properties has 
always been a bad idea, most OOP languages have at least privates to 
hide internal states (it makes no difference whether it is field or DOM) 
and for decades we've tried to do this in ES. Aren't you annoyed every 
time you have to consider whether to attach everything on object and use 
constructor as a closed box around internals (but risking huge memory 
usage) or put things on prototype, but then leaking everything to 
outside word? I do not know your experience, and it's not entirely 
correct argument, but my experience of 25 years with sealed languages 
and 20 years with mishmashed web pages left me with deep feelings, that 
this concept of 'everything sees everything' is deeply flawed (I miss 
scoped styles...). This is simply conceptually wrong.
I wander... have you protested on WeakMaps or Symbols at TC39? Those 
allow to create privates for plain ES... Where is any difference?
3/ Yes! It is more important, that the component's working on authors' 
page, than that developer wants to do whatever they want to do (and by 
hooking attachShadow or even altering source code they still may). It's 
his/hers component :). This simply creates a contract, contract between 
a author and all developers using this component (not just the one who 
want to screw it), it creates contact among different components on the 
page, what they can or cannot do to each other. This is, how it should 
have been from the beginning and we should be here discussing whether we 
need open mode... not the other way around. "Open" is, what's weird 
about ShadowDOM, not "closed".
But I can accept both, because I will assume, that by using open 
component, I can touch inners, author is most likely sure, it will not 
cause any problem. But when I will see closed one, I will assume, that 
it is simply danger.
4/ And again, if you ever find yourself relying on the internal DOM of 
Shadow, either it's poorly written or you are using wrong component.

This is simply both theoretically and practically correct way.


B.


---
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
https://github.com/w3c/webcomponents/issues/499#issuecomment-218848650