Re: Minimum viable custom elements

On Thu, Jan 15, 2015 at 8:03 AM, Anne van Kesteren <annevk@annevk.nl> wrote:
>
>
> * I think we could iterate towards a v2 that has an aspect of
> upgrading but perhaps works a bit differently from the current setup.
> E.g. a way to include an entire subtree of custom elements with a
> fallback mechanism of sorts. Or perhaps something inspired by
> JavaScript modules.
>

Why is "Not having identity at creation-time is currently a mismatch with
the rest of the platform" a problem? Why does it all have to be consistent
across the board? Are there any other platform objects that are created by
HTML parser or a similar device?


> * Upgrading can be added, but moving from Brain transplants to a more
> normal working constructor would be impossible after the fact.
>

Why is this a problem? Is this for design purity?

:DG<