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

Re: Minimum viable custom elements

From: Elliott Sprehn <esprehn@chromium.org>
Date: Sun, 1 Feb 2015 08:41:14 +1100
Message-ID: <CAO9Q3iL_-8koHyAZjUZoHvnLNgJF0HTuAvckpp3mcjad_zF1Yg@mail.gmail.com>
To: Anne van Kesteren <annevk@annevk.nl>
Cc: Alice Boxhall <aboxhall@google.com>, Steve Faulkner <faulkner.steve@gmail.com>, Ryosuke Niwa <rniwa@apple.com>, WebApps WG <public-webapps@w3.org>
On Sat, Jan 31, 2015 at 7:47 PM, Anne van Kesteren <annevk@annevk.nl> wrote:

> On Fri, Jan 30, 2015 at 7:22 PM, Alice Boxhall <aboxhall@google.com>
> wrote:
> > Sure, that works for this example (which was created in a huge rush at
> the
> > last minute before a talk, like probably 90% of my productive work), but
> I
> > don't believe it wouldn't work for
> > http://www.polymer-project.org/components/paper-radio-button/demo.html
> which
> > has a fancy animation for changing states.
>
> That example seems to depend on another proprietary extension:
> -webkit-tap-highlight-color. I can't find anything else that would be
> responsible for the effect.
>
>
The animation is a custom element called <paper-ripple>, where do you see
it using -webkit-tap-highlight-color?


>
> > So, I naively ask, what's stopping us from standardising something like
> > -webkit-appearance: none?
>
> Someone has to put in the work.
>
>
> --
> https://annevankesteren.nl/
>
>
Received on Saturday, 31 January 2015 21:42:24 UTC

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