Re: [webcomponents]: <element> Wars: A New Hope

*"This is just a repackaging of Object.defineProperties( target,
PropertyDescriptors ) thats slightly less obvious because the target
appears to be a string."
*
Is another difference that the 'x-foo' doesn't have to be 'known' yet? It
seems to be a bit more than a repack of Object.defineProperties to me.


On Wed, Apr 17, 2013 at 3:53 PM, Rick Waldron <waldron.rick@gmail.com>wrote:

>
>
>
> On Wed, Apr 17, 2013 at 6:16 PM, Dimitri Glazkov <dglazkov@google.com>wrote:
>
>> Inspired by Allen's and Scott's ideas in the "Benadryl" thread, I dug
>> into understanding what <element> actually represents.
>>
>> It seems that the problem arises when we attempt to make <element>
>> _be_ the document.register invocation, since that draws the line of
>> when the declaration comes to existence (the registration line) and
>> imposes overly restrictive constraints on what we can do with it.
>>
>> What if instead, the mental model of <element> was a statement of
>> intent? In other words, it says: "Hey browser-thing, when the time is
>> right, go ahead and register this custom element. kthxbai"
>>
>> In this model, the proverbial registration line isn't drawn until
>> later (more on that in a moment), which means that both <element> and
>> <script> can contribute to defining the same custom element.
>>
>> With that in mind, we take Scott's/Allen's excellent idea and twist it
>> up a bit. We invent a HTMLElementElement.define method (name TBD),
>> which takes two arguments: a custom element name, and an object. I
>> know folks will cringe, but I am thinking of an Object.create
>> properties object:
>>
>
> The are called Property Descriptors.
>
>
>
>>
>> HTMLElementElement.define('x-foo', {
>>     erhmahgerd: { writable: false, value: "BOOKS!" }
>> });
>>
>>
> This is just a repackaging of Object.defineProperties( target,
> PropertyDescriptors ) thats slightly less obvious because the target
> appears to be a string.
>
>
> Rick
>
>
>
>
>
>> When the registration line comes, the browser-thing matches <element>
>> instances and supplied property objects by custom element names, uses
>> them to create prototypes, and then calls document.register with
>> respective custom element name and prototype as arguments.
>>
>> We now have a working declarative syntax that doesn't hack <script>,
>> is ES6-module-friendly, and still lets Scott build his tacos. Sounds
>> like a win to me. I wonder how Object.create properties object and
>> Class syntax could mesh better. I am sure ES6 Classes peeps will have
>> ideas here.
>>
>> So... When is the registration line? Clearly, by the time the parser
>> finishes with the document, we're too late.
>>
>> We have several choices. We could draw the line for an element when
>> its corresponding </element> is seen in document. This is not going to
>> work for deferred scripts, but maybe that is ok.
>>
>> For <element>s that are imported, we have a nice delineation, since we
>> explicitly process each import in order, so no problems there.
>>
>> What do you think?
>>
>> :DG<
>>
>
>