- From: Trey Shugart <notifications@github.com>
- Date: Fri, 16 Sep 2016 16:02:51 -0700
- To: w3c/webcomponents <webcomponents@noreply.github.com>
- Message-ID: <w3c/webcomponents/issues/566/247728377@github.com>
And FWIW I second @rniwa's proposal, though `get*` might follow existing conventions more closely On Sat, 17 Sep 2016, 08:59 Trey Shugart <treshugart@gmail.com> wrote: > I don't agree that all my use cases were speculative. If we don't have a > standardised way to retrieve a tag name for a constructor, it forces us to > store that information locally. Since part of our API is to have multiple > working versions on the page, we then force internal APIs to never change > else we break that contract. This would be a really nice feature for us to > have. > > On Sat, 17 Sep 2016, 02:33 Domenic Denicola <notifications@github.com> > wrote: > >> The use cases still aren't clear to me; they seem very speculative, >> relating to things that maybe future versions of some libraries might >> choose to do, or to things that can already be done at the library level. >> >> — >> You are receiving this because you authored the thread. >> Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub >> <https://github.com/w3c/webcomponents/issues/566#issuecomment-247646843>, >> or mute the thread >> <https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AAIVbHhRY2qLU-gMgCDlXEdk3gdRt_yeks5qqsTNgaJpZM4J8SND> >> . >> > -- 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/566#issuecomment-247728377
Received on Friday, 16 September 2016 23:03:47 UTC