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

Re: [webcomponents]: HTMLElementElement missing a primitive

From: Dimitri Glazkov <dglazkov@chromium.org>
Date: Fri, 8 Mar 2013 09:16:28 -0800
Message-ID: <CADh5Ky3KnbkD+DvZDBuFLJ0GEmN+m=tPdQJ=8nAaN+AL99i=2Q@mail.gmail.com>
To: Scott Miles <sjmiles@google.com>
Cc: public-webapps <public-webapps@w3.org>
On Thu, Mar 7, 2013 at 2:35 PM, Scott Miles <sjmiles@google.com> wrote:
> Currently, if I document.register something, it's my job to supply a
> complete prototype.
>
> For HTMLElementElement on the other hand, I supply a tag name to extend, and
> the prototype containing the extensions, and the system works out the
> complete prototype.
>
> However, this ability of HTMLElementElement to construct a complete
> prototype from a tag-name is not provided by any imperative API.
>
> As I see it, there are three main choices:
>
> 1. HTMLElementElement is recast as a declarative form of document.register,
> in which case it would have no 'extends' attribute, and you need to make
> your own (complete) prototype.
>
> 2. We make a new API for 'construct prototype from a tag-name to extend and
> a set of extensions'.
>
> 3. Make document.register work like HTMLElementElement does now (it takes a
> tag-name and partial prototype).

4. Let declarative syntax be a superset of the imperative API.

Can you help me understand why you feel that imperative and
declarative approaches must mirror each other exactly?

:DG<
Received on Friday, 8 March 2013 17:17:00 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 26 March 2013 18:49:58 GMT