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

It seems a lot of the people advocating for `is` really wanted to be able to PE the table element.  Specially they wanted to do things like:

``` html
<table>
   <rainbow-row>
```

IIUC this blows up because `<rainbow-row>` gets booted by the parser as it's building the dom model.  I think it's fine though if a `<rainbow-table>` is provided correspondingly.  

Anyways since this scenario is so important to many of the `is` advocates here I'm just placing an appeal that it be one of the primary scenarios driving the investigation of the API and hopefully one of the first test cases for any V2 API improvements.

I'd also like to appeal to everyone to focus in on the "Why?".  You want the `is` element, but "Why?" do you want it?  If we can deliver the "Why?" fast natively for given concrete scenarios without a big bang approach like `is` then hopefully no one feels like they are being left out in the cold.

@prushforth I know you have been doing a lot of work on PE maps, so I hope the underlying considerations there become one of the primary drivers / test cases as well.

-- 
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-266964036