- From: <bugzilla@jessica.w3.org>
- Date: Tue, 15 Jan 2013 12:00:06 +0000
- To: public-webapps-bugzilla@w3.org
https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=18669
--- Comment #42 from brian kardell <bkardell@gmail.com> ---
(In reply to comment #40)
> (In reply to comment #36)
> > Here's an alternative proposal that dglazkov and I came up with over lunch.
> >
> > Provide two alternatives for authors to pick from:
> >
> > 1. Extending an existing element, using the declaration syntax:
> > <element extends="ul" name="mylib-speciallist">
> > ...and the use syntax:
> > <ul is="mylib-speciallist">...</ul>
> > Changing the is="" attribute doesn't do anything (and we provide an API to
> > expose the element's original 'is' value somehow). This is suboptimal (as
> > noted earlier) but it avoids even less pleasant changes to the HTML parser
> > and differences between HTML and XML syntax.
> >
> > 2. Creating new elements that inherit straight from CustomElement (which
> > inherits from Element, like HTMLElement, and has things like .style,
> > focus(), and tabindex=""), using the declaration syntax:
> > <element name="mylib-myelement">
> > ...and the use syntax:
> > <mylib-myelement>
> >
> > (Both types would also be able to extend other components; whether it's the
> > kind of component that extends an existing element type or creates a new
> > element depends on the which is at the root of the hierarchy.)
> >
Since I cannot appear to edit my last question, I want to clarrify: the
element defined in #1 above
With
<element extends="ul" name="mylib-speciallist">
Is the proposal that we actually prohibit or merely discourage people from just
using:
<mylib-speciallist>
Clearly you would loose a band of information in some cases early on as hixie
explained, but ... what happens if you do this? Does it throw or does it work
or what?
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are the QA Contact for the bug.
Received on Tuesday, 15 January 2013 12:00:12 UTC