- From: Scott Miles <sjmiles@google.com>
- Date: Fri, 22 Mar 2013 09:35:46 -0700
- To: Anne van Kesteren <annevk@annevk.nl>
- Cc: Hajime Morrita <morrita@google.com>, public-webapps <public-webapps@w3.org>
Received on Friday, 22 March 2013 16:36:14 UTC
In our work, we adopt a composition rule that a node knows about it's own children and can have expectations of them, but can make no assumptions about it's parent or siblings. As a coding model we've found it to be deterministic enough to build sane constructions. For example, you can use methods/properties on your children, but should only fire events upward. Therefore, our polyfills have an invariant that custom elements are prepared bottom-up (i.e. my children are all upgraded before I am). Scott On Fri, Mar 22, 2013 at 5:42 AM, Anne van Kesteren <annevk@annevk.nl> wrote: > On Fri, Mar 22, 2013 at 6:27 AM, Hajime Morrita <morrita@google.com> > wrote: > > So what about (B): Call <x-child> first and <x-parent> second? This > solves > > the "unreadified <x-child>" problem. > > And you will have a parent that is not ready. > > Or if you have > > <fb-1/><fb-2/> > > you'll either have a previousSibling or nextSibling, depending on > invocation order, that's not ready. Or am I missing something? > > > -- > http://annevankesteren.nl/ > >
Received on Friday, 22 March 2013 16:36:14 UTC