Re: [w3c/webcomponents] Generic programs can't reliably use/manipulate documents via the DOM (#640)

> It does, the same thing as in any generic desktop app development

Just because it's done elsewhere doesn't mean it's right or well-justified.

> the argument is not about "I§m the king of the world and I know best", as it's not in other environments.

Indeed, the argument is long resolved elsewhere, since the language implementations have historically implemented it. This does not -- and should not -- preclude us from making a better or different decision here, and considering fully the implications it will have.

> I can open Delphi (Object Pascal), Visual Studio (C#+.NET) and thou syntax is very different, in semantics it makes no difference, I can tell what is public, what is private, not because being the best, but to define interface. I cannot do that with open shadow DOM, which part is or is not to be messed with.

In my experience, this has been a major pain point for developers when dealing with under-specified components. I hope you are not talking personally about being unable to tell. Clearly an open shadow DOM is something separate, and should be obvious by its inconvenience that it is not designed to be used casually or on a whim.

> Who benefits from it? Every single programmer using 3rd party component.

How? I'm still unclear on this. Perhaps you could give me an example of a 3rd party component developer changing an implementation detail from public to private and it tangibly benefiting one of these programmers.

> I can see usecases for open and closed.

Some examples might be helpful. Why would some components require complete closure of implementation details and others not? How would you ensure that the right one is used for the right usecases?

-- 
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/640#issuecomment-301324107