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

Re: Minimum viable custom elements

From: Dimitri Glazkov <dglazkov@google.com>
Date: Thu, 15 Jan 2015 19:25:48 -0800
Message-ID: <CADh5Ky1OG17-izT6n3fCYS6_Bhb_vKMipusyrs29Xz8aa2fRQQ@mail.gmail.com>
To: Ryosuke Niwa <rniwa@apple.com>
Cc: Domenic Denicola <d@domenic.me>, Erik Arvidsson <arv@google.com>, Anne van Kesteren <annevk@annevk.nl>, Boris Zbarsky <bzbarsky@mit.edu>, public-webapps <public-webapps@w3.org>
On Thu, Jan 15, 2015 at 6:43 PM, Ryosuke Niwa <rniwa@apple.com> wrote:

>
> > On Jan 14, 2015, at 12:52 PM, Dimitri Glazkov <dglazkov@google.com>
> wrote:
> >
> > FWIW, I think that element upgrade is sort of fundamental to the
> usefulness of custom elements. In a world where most scripts are
> non-blocking (that's hopefully the modern world we should aim for), I'll
> effectively expect to walk the tree anyway.
>
> Allowing loading scripts asynchronously, including ones that define custom
> elements, is one thing; automatically resolving script dependencies for
> custom elements is another.


What are the "script dependencies for custom elements" here?


> When an author imports a ES6 module, we don't create a fake object which
> gets resolved later by rewriting its prototype.
>

These are two completely different things, right? In one situation, you are
dealing with HTML Parser and blocking thereof. In another, there's no such
concern.

:DG<
Received on Friday, 16 January 2015 03:26:15 UTC

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