Thanks Scott! I'll take a look at this soon.

On Wed, Jan 22, 2014 at 1:49 PM, Scott Miles <[email protected]> wrote:

> Erps, actual 'vulcanizing' video link:
>
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FvFfJ0ODj0Y&feature=youtu.be
>
>
> On Wed, Jan 22, 2014 at 10:48 AM, Scott Miles <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>> Remixing the polyfills is supposed to be relatively easy.  I assume the
>> devil is in the details, so I made a couple of screen captures of me
>> starting from a blank folder and building up functionality, ultimately
>> constructing a single js file containing the platform remix.
>>
>> remixing:
>> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MfZxqONVzJA&feature=youtu.be
>>
>> vulcanizing the js:
>> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MfZxqONVzJA&feature=youtu.be
>>
>> The resulting files are zipped up here:
>> https://drive.google.com/file/d/0BwsasHLO95kdQXQzLTN2czFjVW8/edit?usp=sharing
>>
>> Tools used: Node, Bower, Terminal, Notepad, Browser.
>>
>> IMO, Bower is preferred over Git here, because we are read-only users in
>> this context, and we can take advantage of the dependency fetching.
>>
>> The videos are kinda blurry (sorry!) and I there is no commentary. I
>> figured we can do progressive refinement on these materials if they are
>> found to be useful.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> On Tue, Jan 21, 2014 at 5:15 PM, Rob Eisenberg <
>> [email protected]> wrote:
>>
>>> Thanks for the feedback. Part of what I'm creating is similar to x-tags,
>>> but with my own spin, based on my own experience building large scale
>>> componentized UI. For now, while I'm prototyping, I think I'll just use the
>>> platform.js file...but eventually I'm going to have to figure out how to do
>>> a custom build without the shadow dom pieces.
>>>
>>>
>>> On Tue, Jan 21, 2014 at 7:04 PM, <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Rob,
>>>>
>>>> I asked a similar question about the "necessity" of the Shadow DOM a
>>>> few months ago -
>>>> https://groups.google.com/forum/?fromgroups=#!topic/polymer-dev/oVWSsMhFDnc.
>>>> Basic upshot was although the polyfills themselves don't have a
>>>> *dependency* on the Shadow DOM, Polymer depends on it, and it will be
>>>> used if you use platform.js as well, even if you are only planning on using
>>>> part of the platform like custom elements.
>>>>
>>>> If you are looking for simple, non-shadow DOM pre-built library, x-tags
>>>> is maybe the way to go (although from my experience, the x-tag community is
>>>> way less active). It is the biggest issue we have with Polymer - the shadow
>>>> DOM polyfill is a bit invasive, and degrades performance - in our case,
>>>> polymer doubles the time to load a page compared to x-tags. We have decided
>>>> we will need to try "re-package" parts of the Polymer platform in our own
>>>> library to get the performance characteristics we require, which is a
>>>> shame, because I really like the library and the layer of sugar it 
>>>> provides.
>>>>
>>>> Regards,
>>>> Ian
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Tuesday, January 21, 2014 8:45:49 AM UTC+11, Rob Eisenberg wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> I think I can answer my own #3 question. Looks like the easiest way to
>>>>> do this is to use pull-all.sh
>>>>> I'd still like to know about the necessity of shadow dom and any
>>>>> availability of pre-built platform libraries.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> On Mon, Jan 20, 2014 at 4:35 PM, Rob Eisenberg <
>>>>> [email protected]> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> Ok. I found that just a few minutes ago. It looks like there are lots
>>>>>> of little pieces that may be missing from what I've got. I've got a few
>>>>>> questions:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> 1. I purposefully excluded the shadow dom pieces from my build. Do
>>>>>> you see any problems with that? Should custom elements still work, 
>>>>>> assuming
>>>>>> I'm not using shadow dom at all?
>>>>>> 2. Where can I find the latest build of platform.js? Let's say I just
>>>>>> want to make my life easy for now...and not do my own build. Where do I 
>>>>>> get
>>>>>> latest? None of the github releases seem to have any actual built 
>>>>>> libraries
>>>>>> in them.
>>>>>> 3. Any advice on building this thing? There are tons of repositories.
>>>>>> It seems like a major effort to track them all and keep an updated build
>>>>>> happening...thoughts?
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On Mon, Jan 20, 2014 at 4:27 PM, Scott Miles <[email protected]>wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>  The build is sadly non-trivial, but you can start with the
>>>>>>> manifest here:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> https://github.com/Polymer/platform-dev/blob/master/build.json
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On Mon, Jan 20, 2014 at 12:21 PM, Rob Eisenberg <
>>>>>>> [email protected]> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> There's definitely a difference between my custom build of the
>>>>>>>> pollyfills and platform.js. When I replace my build with platform.js, 
>>>>>>>> I see
>>>>>>>> the correct behavior. I would just use platform.js, but there's some 
>>>>>>>> stuff
>>>>>>>> in there I don't think I need..and I'm trying to get things down as 
>>>>>>>> small
>>>>>>>> as possible. Can someone point me to the build file for platform.js? 
>>>>>>>> I'd
>>>>>>>> like to see if I can figure out what the real difference is.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On Thursday, January 16, 2014 12:13:59 PM UTC-5, Rob Eisenberg
>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> I had a pretty nice custom element system build on the pollyfills
>>>>>>>>> from Stable release 2013-11-07  When I updated to 0.1.2, everything 
>>>>>>>>> broke.
>>>>>>>>> I've been going throughout, fixing things bit by bit, but now I'm to a
>>>>>>>>> point where I'm wondering if there's something wrong with Polymer. It 
>>>>>>>>> seems
>>>>>>>>> as if custom element binding are being evaluated before the element is
>>>>>>>>> upgraded. I'm not sure about that, but I can't explain the behavior 
>>>>>>>>> I'm
>>>>>>>>> seeing any other way. Here's my custom element test code:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> var proto = Object.create(HTMLElement.prototype);
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> proto.createdCallback = function () {
>>>>>>>>>     this.customAttributes = {};
>>>>>>>>>     console.log('created');
>>>>>>>>> };
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> proto.attachedCallback = function() {
>>>>>>>>>     console.log('attached');
>>>>>>>>> };
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> proto.bind = function(name, value, oneTime) {
>>>>>>>>>     console.log('bind', name, value, oneTime);
>>>>>>>>> };
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> proto.setAttribute = function(name, value) {
>>>>>>>>>     console.log('setAttribute', name, value);
>>>>>>>>> };
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> proto.attributeChangedCallback = function(attrName, oldVal,
>>>>>>>>> newVal) {
>>>>>>>>>     console.log('attribute changed', attrName, oldVal, newVal);
>>>>>>>>> };
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Object.defineProperty(proto, 'something', {
>>>>>>>>>     get: function () {
>>>>>>>>>         return this.customAttributes['something'];
>>>>>>>>>     },
>>>>>>>>>     set: function (val) {
>>>>>>>>>         this.customAttributes['something'] = value;
>>>>>>>>>         console.log('something change', value);
>>>>>>>>>     }
>>>>>>>>> });
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> document.registerElement('dx-test', { prototype: proto });
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Then I use it inside of one of my templates like this:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> <dx-test something="{{someProperty}}"></dx-test>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> When I do this, the only callback that is fired is *createdCallback
>>>>>>>>> * and by then it seems to have already parsed the bindings out.
>>>>>>>>> This prevents me from having any custom *bind* logic and even
>>>>>>>>> from reliably getting the value of my own property. If *something* is
>>>>>>>>> not a primitive value, then attribute's value is the result of
>>>>>>>>> *toString().*
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Am I doing something wrong here? Is this a bug?
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>  Follow Polymer on Google+: plus.google.com/107187849809354688692
>>>>>>>> ---
>>>>>>>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
>>>>>>>> Groups "Polymer" group.
>>>>>>>> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it,
>>>>>>>> send an email to [email protected].
>>>>>>>>  To view this discussion on the web visit
>>>>>>>> https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/polymer-dev/70e68a23-
>>>>>>>> a5aa-4b1a-8b7e-48de9604325a%40googlegroups.com.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> --
>>>>>> Rob Eisenberg,
>>>>>> President - Blue Spire
>>>>>> www.durandaljs.com
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> --
>>>>> Rob Eisenberg,
>>>>> President - Blue Spire
>>>>> www.durandaljs.com
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> Rob Eisenberg,
>>> President - Blue Spire
>>> www.durandaljs.com
>>>
>>
>>
>  Follow Polymer on Google+: plus.google.com/107187849809354688692
> ---
> You received this message because you are subscribed to a topic in the
> Google Groups "Polymer" group.
> To unsubscribe from this topic, visit
> https://groups.google.com/d/topic/polymer-dev/puRMCV1-8nI/unsubscribe.
> To unsubscribe from this group and all its topics, send an email to
> [email protected].
> To view this discussion on the web visit
> https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/polymer-dev/CAHbmOLZxfQq4yDfnPUtuXY%3DvL2h3N3ckKFfuqbw%2BPHkvb7O_5A%40mail.gmail.com
> .
>
> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
>



-- 
Rob Eisenberg,
President - Blue Spire
www.durandaljs.com

Follow Polymer on Google+: plus.google.com/107187849809354688692
--- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Polymer" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to [email protected].
To view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/polymer-dev/CAMsr9Pm2FAycLjknWzuLLmEkMyveKhrz6YJnws0u-y7AdzH3AA%40mail.gmail.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.

Reply via email to