- From: Dimitri Glazkov <dglazkov@chromium.org>
- Date: Tue, 12 Feb 2013 09:06:03 -0800
- To: Anne van Kesteren <annevk@annevk.nl>
- Cc: WebApps WG <public-webapps@w3.org>
- Message-ID: <CADh5Ky0ETK7rXs2tEtSgbKd9Gx+5aWZGM0phW1PPFyzv2zXj7A@mail.gmail.com>
On Tue, Feb 12, 2013 at 3:24 AM, Anne van Kesteren <annevk@annevk.nl> wrote: > If the goal of custom elements is to expose the guts of what happens > > https://dvcs.w3.org/hg/webcomponents/raw-file/tip/spec/custom/index.html#monkeypatch-create-element > is the wrong solution. Currently new Image() and createElement("img") > are equivalent and no additional magic is required. Same for new > Audio() and createElement("audio"). What we want is that > > var x = document.createElement(name) > > maps to / is identical to > > var x = new name's-corresponding-object > > and nothing else. > ... and that's exactly how custom elements are being spec'd. See how constructor is generated: https://dvcs.w3.org/hg/webcomponents/raw-file/tip/spec/custom/index.html#dfn-custom-element-constructor-generation By the wrongness, do you mean the running shadow tree instantiation and element finalization steps? If so, they are workarounds for our inability to define an author-defined constructor. There's a nice thread that tries to enable this and eliminate these extra steps, but from what I understand, there's a monkey wrench thrown by inability of current JS engines to accommodate the proposed design: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-webapps/2013JanMar/thread.html#msg250 :DG<
Received on Tuesday, 12 February 2013 17:06:32 UTC