- From: Patrick H. Lauke <redux@splintered.co.uk>
- Date: Sun, 14 Jun 2015 01:41:27 +0100
- To: Bruce Lawson <brucel@opera.com>, lwatson@paciellogroup.com
- CC: Tobie Langel <tobie@codespeaks.com>, WebApps WG <public-webapps@w3.org>
On 13/06/2015 16:33, Bruce Lawson wrote: > On 13 June 2015 at 15:30, Léonie Watson <lwatson@paciellogroup.com> wrote: >> why not use the extends= syntax you mentioned? >> >> <my-button extends="button" attributes>Push</my-button> > > because browsers that don't know about web components wouldn't pay any > attention to <my-button>, and render "Push" as plain text. > > Browsers that don't know about web components will fall back to > <button> with <button > this-is-made-much-more-marvellous-by="my-button"> (or whatever) However, this fallback will only really be useful for very simple cases, where web components have been used to jazz up what essentially is still the element that was extended. And, I would posit, any scripting that was done to act on the all-singing, all-dancing new web component button (if it does anything more than a regular button) would not work for the fallback. Unless it's really just using web components for fancy styling (for instance having a "material design" button that essentially still works just like a button) - in which case, it makes more sense to work on stylability of standard elements. P -- Patrick H. Lauke www.splintered.co.uk | https://github.com/patrickhlauke http://flickr.com/photos/redux/ | http://redux.deviantart.com twitter: @patrick_h_lauke | skype: patrick_h_lauke
Received on Sunday, 14 June 2015 00:41:58 UTC