W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-webapps@w3.org > April to June 2012

Re: [webcomponents] Custom Elements Spec

From: Ian Hickson <ian@hixie.ch>
Date: Fri, 4 May 2012 04:19:51 +0000 (UTC)
To: Dimitri Glazkov <dglazkov@chromium.org>
cc: public-webapps <public-webapps@w3.org>
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.64.1205040415330.9926@ps20323.dreamhostps.com>
On Tue, 1 May 2012, Dimitri Glazkov wrote:
> Custom tags vs. "is" attribute
> - "is" attribute is awkward, overly verbose
> - custom tags introduce local semantics
> - perhaps start with something as simple as reserving "x-" prefix on
> HTML tags for local semantics.

Whether it's

   <x-colour-picker fallback="select">


   <select is="colour-picker">

...you have the same level of awkwardness. The advantage of the second 
one, aside from being less ugly and generally terser, is that it actually 
has workable fallback in legacy UAs -- the first one would only work in 
UAs that supported components or at a minimum knew enough about components 
to know how the fallback mechanism worked. (Also, the first one runs the 
risk that authors would start forgetting to give a fallback, with its 
resulting implications on accessibility, search engines, etc.)

Ian Hickson               U+1047E                )\._.,--....,'``.    fL
http://ln.hixie.ch/       U+263A                /,   _.. \   _\  ;`._ ,.
Things that are impossible just take longer.   `._.-(,_..'--(,_..'`-.;.'
Received on Friday, 4 May 2012 04:20:17 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 18:13:33 UTC