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

@rniwa no need for paternalistic recitation of the general purpose and responsibilities of web specs, I'm well aware of the process and implications of developing web standards.

Now, on to actual discussion:

The items I mentioned are not subjective, and ironically, are backed by the same need to account for the sort of long-term impacts you replied with. Namely, what kind of web do we want, and what should be present to ensure common ergonomics, utilities, and features continue to be supported.

One of these is View Source. I realize in an age where some apps choose to render code primarily on the server and output amorphous blobs to the client, it's tempting to cut View Source from the requirements list. I believe that's a mistake, again, for the very reasons you outline. View Source, and the ergonomics of scanning code in markup and declarative contexts, is unbelievably important and a fundamental web convention that should be retained. The winds of client code and app frameworks are ever changing, and I'd almost never bet on their pendulum staying to one side for long. As such, it's incredibly important that we not entrench APIs in the imperative JS context. I believe it abandons developers and use cases that benefit from the inherent linkage of markup and declarative code to its semantic intent and functional purpose.

After looking over the links presented here, why isn't this a case of "Yes, and"? There are clear benefits provided by the lengthy API/specs you cited, but what isn't clear is why their pursuit should be at the exclusion of something like `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-280925969