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

@oleersoy Yes, my apologies for not addressing your point exactly.  A bit of a fog at 6 this morning :-) 

If none of the components work on a page that is quite a catastrophe, I guess, but at least the map would still show up if the HTML author had taken the care to provide an image map fallback, not that everyone would care enough to do so.

> That's the whole point of it. 

 Not quite the whole point; I guess not a lot of people shut JS off; perhaps a more important point is to progressively enhance towards swan-map as much as possible, given the availability of network resources.  So, the `<map is="swan-map">` would load as much of its content (assuming all the JS loads) as it can, and display what it can.  I think even if none of the layers loads, if the img upon which an image map is based loads, the JS implementation of swan-map (of either built-in or autonomous variety) could still provide a responsive version of the image map, at least.  So the 'progressive' part can be partial, it does not have to just be a complete fallback, but the complete fallback is always there as a backstop for the `<map is="swan-map">` version.  That is what is so compelling about customized built-ins: they permit and encourage the evolution of the Web because we can say, hey users and platform guys, how about this feature for HTML%name%Element???  Autonomous elements are nice and all, but they lack this feature, IMHO.

>  If javascript is definitely going to be available then we might as well do <swan-map>.

Just to reiterate, the part where 'no JS' gets interesting to me is when the HTML author wants to use the **native** implementation of  `<map is="swan-map">` where available thus not needing the prollyfill.  Where the **native** implementation of  `<map is="swan-map">` is not complete, the Customized Built-In `<map is="swan-map">`  is used; **CSS selectors and JS references don't need to be changed**.  So it's not like saying everyone should disable JS - far from it!  It's using JS to enhance the user's experience where possible/necessary. That is all.  Such a scenario can't play out under the 'no `is="..."` ' future; everything would be a `<swan-map>` which is why I asked @rniwa what he sees as a reasonable replacement for`is`.

-- 
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-266516317