Re: [WICG/webcomponents] Web components should be able to easily adapt to the host page while maintaining enapsulation (Issue #986)

> The other competing vision of web components as essentially "macros" for more DOM has the problem that it's not a portable concept.

Sigh. Not sure if it's worth pointing out, for the Nth time, that the use cases that motivated this thread are *not* about the model of web components as macros. It's like people are so convinced that there can only be two views on what WC should be able to do, they desperately try to shoehorn any view into one of these. Every time I think I've finally explained the problem statement well (even with a concrete example [here](https://github.com/WICG/webcomponents/issues/986#issuecomment-1458842187)), someone else comes along that has misunderstood the entire problem statement, and I’m out of ideas about how else to explain it. 😔

> I tended to side with @caridy and @domenic's idea, of web components being decoration on top of light DOM where the interesting stuff was. The current problem with this vision is that it only works if you are ok with the fallback.

I’m…honestly not sure how this relates to the problem statement. Is the idea that `<fancy-input>` should only ever use form elements provided by the user in the light DOM, and authors should simply not use form elements in the shadow DOM? What is the shadow DOM *for* in this view? Just divs and spans around light DOM content? 
Thought exercise: What should the HTML API be for a dual handle slider component?

-- 
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
https://github.com/WICG/webcomponents/issues/986#issuecomment-1472095771
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.

Message ID: <WICG/webcomponents/issues/986/1472095771@github.com>