- From: Ryosuke Niwa <rniwa@apple.com>
- Date: Mon, 09 Dec 2013 20:57:02 -0800
- To: "Tab Atkins Jr." <jackalmage@gmail.com>
- Cc: Dominic Cooney <dominicc@google.com>, Hajime Morrita <morrita@google.com>, Dimitri Glazkov <dglazkov@chromium.org>, "public-webapps@w3.org WG" <public-webapps@w3.org>, Jan Miksovsky <jan@quickui.org>
On Dec 9, 2013, at 8:45 PM, "Tab Atkins Jr." <jackalmage@gmail.com> wrote: > On Tue, Dec 10, 2013 at 3:33 PM, Ryosuke Niwa <rniwa@apple.com> wrote: >> In fact, why do we even bother to add any new API at all for web components >> if our primary target was framework authors. Ember.js, Angular JS, etc... >> all work great already because they add an abstraction layer on top of DOM. >> As currently argued by many representatives of Google, we'll be adding a >> bunch of APIs for frameworks to define declarative syntax, etc... each of >> which may or may not be interoperable with one another thereby making it >> impossible for us to later introduce one unified API. If that were true, >> then web components specifications don't satisfy the previously claimed goal >> of letting multiple frameworks and libraries to co-exist at all. > > Responding to an "I don't think we need to add that much sugar right > now" opinion with a "Well then why bother adding any sugar at all?!?" > is never helpful. This is not an all-or-nothing thing, it's a search > for the right level of sugaring to bake into the browser. And I'm claiming that the right level of sugaring should be decided based on needs of authors, not just of framework authors. - R. Niwa
Received on Tuesday, 10 December 2013 04:57:58 UTC