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

> By the way, I agree that is looks horrifying, and is very counter‐intuitive. Everyone agree it’s a hack.

Whooohh - For a seconds there I was starting to worry that I was just drinking too much espresso in the morning :).

>  Maybe if we did everything from scratch, we wouldn’t need is, but as it stands, it’s very necessary. Besides being useful for the progressive enhancement: if I have a button type="submit" is="my-button" it will act like a regular submit button if either the browser doesn’t support custom elements, or if the user has JavaScript disabled.

Great points.  Polymer and web-components-lite support the usage of `is`.  If people like it and want to use it, great.  Some people like the fat arrow, some people like coffeescript, etc. and obviously they free to use all these tools.  

I'm fine with `is` being used a tool / a component of a framework / syntactic sugar.  I just don't think that `is` should be in the spec because it's the type of thing that when browser vendors can't agree on one simple thing, it's likely to have repercussions down the line that slow down progress for the rest of us.

-- 
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-259179189