Re: [w3c/webcomponents] Should custom elements be adoptable if so, how? (#512)

> The Fourth Proposal(tm) is that by default custom elements downgrade, then maybe upgrade, per your definitions. However, if custom elements have a adoptedCallback (to be introduced at a later stage), they would not be downgraded (or proto-swizzled) and remain the same object.

Which element definition is consulted for this opt-out? The source, I'd guess?

> So overall it's no different from the "Downgrade, then maybe upgrade" proposal, except that the future story is a little different (and better, imo).

And you're not bothered by the fact that it runs two different constructors on the same element by default? And doesn't match built-ins?

> Point of fact: <img> has nontrivial "adopting steps".

Thanks for the correction!

---
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/512#issuecomment-226415856