- From: Jonas Sicking <jonas@sicking.cc>
- Date: Thu, 28 Apr 2011 02:33:26 -0700
- To: Maciej Stachowiak <mjs@apple.com>
- Cc: Rafael Weinstein <rafaelw@google.com>, Olli@pettay.fi, public-webapps@w3.org
On Thu, Apr 28, 2011 at 2:02 AM, Maciej Stachowiak <mjs@apple.com> wrote: > > On Apr 27, 2011, at 6:46 PM, Rafael Weinstein wrote: > >>> >>> >>>> >>>> What do you think? >>>> >>> >>> - Is this something you'd like to be implemented in the browsers, >> >> Yes. >> >>> and if yes, why? What would be the reasons to not just use script >>> libraries (like your prototype). >> >> FAQ item also coming for this. > > Having heard Rafael's spiel for this previously, I believe there are some things that templating engines want to do, which are hard to do efficiently and conveniently using the existing Web platform. > > However, I think it would be better to add primitives to the Web platform that could be used by the many templating libraries that already exist, at least as a first step: > > - There is a lot of code built using many of the existing templating solutions. If we provide primitives that let those libraries become more efficient, that is a greater immediate payoff than creating a new templating system, where Web apps would have to be rewritten to take advantage. > > - It seems somewhat hubristic to assume that a newly invented templating library is so superior to all the already existing solutions that we should encode its particular design choices into the Web platform immediately. > > - This new templating library doesn't have enough real apps built on it yet to know if it is a good solution to author problems. > > - Creating APIs is best done incrementally. API is forever, on the Web. > > - Looking at the history of querySelector(), I come to the following conclusion: when there are already a lot of library-based solutions to a problem, the best approach is to provide technology that can be used inside those libraries to improve them; this is more valuable than creating an API with a primary goal of direct use. querySelector gets used a lot more via popular JavaScript libraries than directly, and should have paid more attention to that use case in the first place. > > Perhaps there are novel arguments that will dissuade me from this line of thinking, but these are my tentative thoughts. I agree with much of this. However it's hard to judge without a bit more meat on it. Do you have any ideas for what such primitives would look like? / Jonas
Received on Thursday, 28 April 2011 09:34:24 UTC