W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-webapps@w3.org > January to March 2013

Re: Custom elements ES6/ES5 syntax compromise, was: document.register and ES6

From: Dimitri Glazkov <dglazkov@google.com>
Date: Thu, 14 Feb 2013 14:48:07 -0800
Message-ID: <CADh5Ky0khpzAKYUEeq2hdYP-FwXGwjMnSsOHdP57CinTeCQDBA@mail.gmail.com>
To: Scott Miles <sjmiles@google.com>
Cc: Rick Waldron <waldron.rick@gmail.com>, Erik Arvidsson <arv@chromium.org>, public-webapps <public-webapps@w3.org>, Daniel Buchner <daniel@mozilla.com>, Boris Zbarsky <bzbarsky@mit.edu>, Anne van Kesteren <annevk@annevk.nl>
On Thu, Feb 14, 2013 at 2:23 PM, Scott Miles <sjmiles@google.com> wrote:
> MyButton = document.register(‘x-button’, {
>   prototype: MyButton.prototype,
>   lifecycle: {
>      created: MyButton
>   }
> });
>
> What's the benefit of allowing this syntax? I don't immediately see why you
> couldn't just do it the other way.

Daniel answered the direct question, I think, but let me see if I
understand the question hiding behind your question :)

Why can't we just have one API, since these two are so close already?
In other words, can we not just use "constructor" API and return a
generated constructor?

Do I get a cookie? :)

:DG<
Received on Thursday, 14 February 2013 22:48:38 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 26 March 2013 18:49:57 GMT