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

> I really think for this case it is considerably more practical on all
accounts to come up with solution that is broad-sweeping. The use case:
Allow developers to build custom elements with all the same affordances,
conveniences, and behaviors to built-ins. Requiring a user-story other than
this is a political movement that we all know will block or stall progress
on this issue for YEARS if not indefinitely.

It couldn't be any closer to the truth than this. Vendors should rewrite
native elements using the custom element API and go from there.

On Feb 22, 2017 4:40 PM, "Peter Rushforth" <notifications@github.com> wrote:

> My use case is this: I want to be able to extend the declarative web with
> new features/behaviour for existing elements. Even if I have to completely
> re-write the features I need for an element in script i.e. it inherits
> nothing except the name (not perfect, but easy, I guess). I want to use
> this facility to propose new features for HTML, and I want to be able to
> provide a customised built-in as a polyfill for the day when the feature is
> implemented in some browser but not others/all. In this way, I see
> customised built-in elements alleviating some of the political pressure to
> implement features natively which could otherwise continue to happily exist
> as community-supported customised built-in elements.
>
> —
> You are receiving this because you were mentioned.
> Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub
> <https://github.com/w3c/webcomponents/issues/509#issuecomment-281852864>,
> or mute the thread
> <https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AASKzv-40Ym77cIgDgu8i0sMl4xD8tX_ks5rfNWWgaJpZM4Iq2sA>
> .
>


-- 
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-281895072