Re: [webcomponents] How about let's go with slots? from Dimitri Glazkov on 2015-05-19 (public-webapps@w3.org from April to June 2015)

From: Dimitri Glazkov <dglazkov@google.com>
Date: Tue, 19 May 2015 10:24:02 -0700
To: Domenic Denicola <d@domenic.me>
Cc: Elliott Sprehn <esprehn@chromium.org>, Justin Fagnani <justinfagnani@google.com>, "philip@philipwalton.com" <philip@philipwalton.com>, "dfreedm@google.com" <dfreedm@google.com>, "sjmiles@google.com" <sjmiles@google.com>, "rniwa@apple.com" <rniwa@apple.com>, "eoconnor@apple.com" <eoconnor@apple.com>, "annevk@annevk.nl" <annevk@annevk.nl>, "travis.leithead@microsoft.com" <travis.leithead@microsoft.com>, "mjs@apple.com" <mjs@apple.com>, "arronei@microsoft.com" <arronei@microsoft.com>, "slightlyoff@google.com" <slightlyoff@google.com>, "public-webapps@w3.org" <public-webapps@w3.org>
Message-ID: <CADh5Ky28DAz0i57_NQwHF8GMF2FxzS89UabbLtvJi-TLSCZU5A@mail.gmail.com>

On Tue, May 19, 2015 at 10:09 AM, Domenic Denicola <d@domenic.me> wrote:
>
> I think this model you cite Polymer using is different from what HTML
> normally does, which is why it was confusing to me. In HTML the "insertion
> point tags" (e.g. <summary> or <li> or <option>) act as dumb containers.
> This was reinforced by the examples in the proposal, which use <div
> content-slot=""> with the div being a clear dumb container. You cannot
> replace them with your own choice of container and have things still work.
>

Not sure what you mean by "Polymer model". When we have custom elements,
the assumption of dumb containers simply goes out of the window.

:DG<

Received on Tuesday, 19 May 2015 17:24:30 UTC