Re: [w3c/webcomponents] Consider adding a childrenChangedCallback or something (#619)

i'm hugely in favor of not leaving MutationObserver *partially* re-implemented in Web Components (only having a `attributeChangedCallback`). I'd like to see either no duplication between functionality (as in, remove `attributeChangedCallback` entirely, and drop a 2.0), or add all capabilities of MutationObserver. 

I don't care about characterData, but it seems odd to fix the `childrenChanged`/`attributeChanged` discrepancy between MutationObserver and Custom Elements without fixing the `characterDataChanged` discrepancy. Getting 2/3 of the way to parity looks like progress to be, but it still looks funky when some people are going to end up breaking out MutationObserver anyway. (Not that I have much idea what a good characterData use case 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/619#issuecomment-270277716