- From: Domenic Denicola <d@domenic.me>
- Date: Wed, 28 Jan 2015 05:08:27 +0000
- To: Elliott Sprehn <esprehn@google.com>
- CC: Yehuda Katz <wycats@gmail.com>, Dimitri Glazkov <dglazkov@google.com>, Erik Arvidsson <arv@google.com>, Dmitry Lomov <dslomov@chromium.org>, WebApps WG <public-webapps@w3.org>
It does. If a framework says “use clonedCallback and we will implementing cloning for you,” we cannot add a clonedCallback with our own semantics. Whereas, if a framework says “use [Framework.cloned] and we will implement cloning for you,” we’re in the clear. Better yet! If a framework is a bad citizen and says “we did Element.cloned = Symbol() for you; now use [Element.cloned] and we will implement cloning for you,” we are still in the clear, since the original Element.cloned we supply with the browser is not === to the Element.cloned supplied by the framework. This last is not at all possible with string-valued properties, since the string “clonedCallback” is the same no matter who supplies it.
Received on Wednesday, 28 January 2015 05:08:58 UTC