W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-webapps@w3.org > January to March 2015

Re: Custom element lifecycle callbacks

From: Adam Klein <adamk@chromium.org>
Date: Thu, 8 Jan 2015 18:30:43 -0800
Message-ID: <CAEvLGc+XCfSLT3kCQfUR=doYiz6vdmL91YxaJC0+dR9EzhZYLA@mail.gmail.com>
To: Anne van Kesteren <annevk@annevk.nl>
Cc: WebApps WG <public-webapps@w3.org>
On Thu, Jan 8, 2015 at 7:56 AM, Anne van Kesteren <annevk@annevk.nl> wrote:

> 1) Can we use symbols to identify these instead? That gives us a
> guarantee they won't be used for other things and makes it somewhat
> safer to put them where they are located now.
>

As Dimitri noted, I've expressed mild concerns about this in the past, but
I may be coming around to the idea. The main advantage of using Symbols is
that it would guarantee us the ability to add new callbacks in the future
without fear of breaking existing elements, though I don't know how
realistic a concern that is given the "Callback" suffix all these names
have.

Do you have a proposal for where these symbols would be vended? In ES,
builtin symbols are available as properties on the Symbol object, but
clearly WebIDL shouldn't be adding things there. This might be a good
question for public-script-coord.

- Adam
Received on Friday, 9 January 2015 02:31:10 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Friday, 27 October 2017 07:27:25 UTC