Re: [w3c/webcomponents] Anonymous custom elements 匿名自定义组件 (#842)

@justinfagnani Scoped registries will be great! But they solve a different problem, no? The focus here is that having to learn and think about registries — whether global or scoped — adds conceptual load. Scoped registries increase (rather than decrease) the knowledge and code required to instantiate an element:

```js
class MyElement extends HTMLElement {}
const myRegistry = new CustomElementRegistry(window.customElements);
myRegistry.define('my-element', MyElement);
const myElement = new MyElement();
```

[I'm not entirely sure the above would actually work. The examples at #716 show the association of a scoped registry with a shadow root. If that's absolutely required — e.g., to avoid name conflicts with those in the global registry — then even the verbose code above wouldn't be possible to instantiate elements at the document level.]

The main thing I'm trying to convey is that, over the past couple of years, I've come to realize that the number of situations in which I actually care about the tag name is small. In which the tag name is, at best, a side concern, it would be nicer to be able to just create the class and instantiate it.

Addressing this is clearly not essential — we can work around the problem. But looking at other libraries on the web today that export classes, I can usually instantiate those classes immediately; no other bookkeeping is required. I'm just observing that the need to register classes at all makes working with custom element classes more complex.

-- 
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/842#issuecomment-539615845