Custom elements have a closure to work in, as well as their own prototypes. I don't believe ES6 modules add much in this regard (possibly I'm missing something there). Separate global scope is a bigger issue. I believe there was general agreement to pursue (at some point) an otp-in 'isolated' mode for custom elements, where each element would have it's own global scope and access to a sealed version of the JS/DOM apis. Scott On Mon, May 20, 2013 at 1:26 PM, John J Barton <johnjbarton@johnjbarton.com>wrote: > Aren't ES6 modules is a good-enough solution for this issue? They make > global collision rare and likely to be what the author really needed. > > jjb > > > On Mon, May 20, 2013 at 1:00 PM, Aaron Boodman <aa@google.com> wrote: > >> Hello public-webapps, >> >> I have been following along with web components, and am really excited >> about the potential. >> >> However, I just realized that unlike the DOM and CSS, there is no real >> isolation for JavaScript in a custom element. In particular, the global >> scope is shared. >> >> This seems really unfortunate to me, and limits the ability of element >> authors to create robustly reusable components. >> >> I would like to suggest that custom elements have the ability to ask for >> a separate global scope for their JavaScript. This would be analogous to >> what happens today when you have multiple script-connected frames on the >> same origin. >> >> Has there been any thought along these lines in the past? >> >> Thanks, >> >> - a >> > >
Received on Monday, 20 May 2013 20:37:47 UTC