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

Re: Custom element design with ES6 classes and Element constructors

From: Ryosuke Niwa <rniwa@apple.com>
Date: Mon, 12 Jan 2015 14:44:52 -0800
Cc: Domenic Denicola <d@domenic.me>, WebApps WG <public-webapps@w3.org>
Message-id: <550797C9-AB30-4318-A69C-373F205C989D@apple.com>
To: Anne van Kesteren <annevk@annevk.nl>

> On Jan 12, 2015, at 5:16 AM, Anne van Kesteren <annevk@annevk.nl> wrote:
> On Sun, Jan 11, 2015 at 9:13 PM, Domenic Denicola <d@domenic.me> wrote:
>> However, I don't understand how to make it work for upgraded elements at all
> Yes, upgrading is the problem. There's two strategies as far as I can
> tell to maintain a sane class design:
> 1) There is no upgrading. We synchronously invoke the correct
> constructor. I've been trying to figure out the drawbacks, but I can't
> find the set of mutation events problems that relates to this. One
> obvious drawback is needing to have all the code in place so you might
> need a way to delay the parser (return of synchronous <script>
> loading).
> 2) As you indicate, upgrading becomes replacing. This used to be the
> old model and got eventually killed through
> https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=21063 though there's no
> clear summary as to why that happened. Issues seem to be: mutation
> observer spam, dangling references, attributes, event listeners.

As we have repeatedly stated elsewhere in the mailing list, we support option 1
since authors and frameworks can trivially implement 2 or choose to set "prototype"
without us baking the feature into the platform.

- R. Niwa

Received on Monday, 12 January 2015 22:45:22 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 18:14:43 UTC