Re: [w3c/webcomponents] The is="" attribute is confusing? Maybe we should encourage only ES6 class-based extension. (#509)

> My point is that HTML and JS are not the same language, so HTML doesn't owe any conceptual tip of the hat to JS. In that light, <button is="my-button"> is quite natural for HTML authors.

Maybe but it brings up a question.  Why not just do `<my-button>`?  It's shorter.  It's more DRY. It's an element.  HTML developers know what elements are.  We don't have to explain what the `is` is for and it offers a cleaner and simpler development path than the indirection brought up by `is`.

The other question becomes when do we do `<my-button>` and when do we do `<button is="my-button"`>?

I get that with `is` we still get a button, but that button has to do something.  With is does something it interacts with other things.  If we are using `is` we are introducing a fork in the development approach.  If the API that comes with `<my-button>` has not loaded then the development approach needed for a satisfying customer experience is completely different.  Now we need two people to screw in the lightbulb.  We have to write more design documentation.  We have to write more tests.  Etc. Etc. Etc.

-- 
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
https://github.com/w3c/webcomponents/issues/509#issuecomment-264967066