Re: [w3c/webcomponents] The is="" attribute is confusing? Maybe we should encourage only ES6 class-based extension. (#509)

I am studying Custom Elements v1 right now, and I have to say I think that the is="" syntax is quite natural.  I don't think HTML authors will be confused by this, as it is not actually JavaScript at that point and so the class inheritance business is not really in the mind of the HTML author.  However, inheriting the API of the element which you're extending could be a great benefit, if it can be done technically.  Even  if it can't, executing the behaviour of the element in the case JS didn't execute properly would still make it worthwhile, because that is a "fallback"; I don't see how that could be done without using the original element.  That is all.  Thanks for Custom Elements, I think they are great.  Keep up the good work!

-- 
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/509#issuecomment-263948285