Yup, looks like polymer was trying to point out my issue.  I will 
sheepishly quite down.

Using a combined stylesheet (bootstrap, font-awesome, animate.css only x1 
this time) in 50+ elements still chugs a little with the polyfill Shadow 
Dom, but nothing too unreasonable.  Native is awesome.

Thanks for your help and apologies.


On Monday, March 3, 2014 12:19:54 PM UTC-8, Steve Orvell wrote:
>
> The base.css file is really big: 30k lines, 1MB. Is that intended? It 
> looks like it has 8 copies of each stylesheet.
>
>
> On Mon, Mar 3, 2014 at 10:08 AM, Justin Merz <[email protected]<javascript:>
> > wrote:
>
>> Apologies, I never did a dry run from the repo, cleaned up a could things 
>> and should work now: 
>>
>> https://github.com/jrmerz/polymer-stylesheet-loading
>>
>>
>> On Saturday, March 1, 2014 7:32:47 PM UTC-8, Justin Merz wrote:
>>>
>>> So I have attempted to put together an example, wasn't sure how to do it 
>>> w/ jsbin.  Here is a simple node server that will create a tree of n depth 
>>> with x number of elements at each depth (so you can modify app size). 
>>>  Finally there is a flag to include stylesheets into each node or not. 
>>>  Note the load difference between including a stylesheet and not including. 
>>>  base.css has bootstrap, font-awesome, animate.css included in it.
>>>
>>> https://github.com/jrmerz/polymer-stylesheet-loading
>>>
>>> Flags are in mkele.js:
>>> // how deep the element tree should be
>>> var depth = 3; 
>>> // how many elements at each level 
>>> var eleCount = 4; 
>>> // should a stylesheet be included 
>>> var noStyle = false;
>>>
>>> On Thursday, February 27, 2014 2:12:07 PM UTC-8, Justin Merz wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Thanks.  I'll try put together a sample of the badness for you to 
>>>> inspect.
>>>>
>>>> And +1 for the 'make a given (potentially document level) stylesheet 
>>>> apply here' flag.
>>>>
>>>> On Thursday, February 27, 2014 10:19:27 AM UTC-8, Steve Orvell wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> -Chrome 33
>>>>>>   Polymer as a fit, spins and spins then either Chrome dies or loads 
>>>>>> after a very intense process (guessing bug?).
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> That sounds like a bug and let's separate it from the design question 
>>>>> here. It may be related to loading and/or shimming specific stylesheets 
>>>>> to 
>>>>> work in the polyfill. We'll be happy to investigate a test case.
>>>>>
>>>>> I'm interested if there is a proposed solution for global styling.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Our team has been discussing this but there's not yet an accepted 
>>>>> solution. In the native implementation duplicate style elements are 
>>>>> optimized such that they share resources. However, style elements that 
>>>>> load 
>>>>> remote resources (e.g. @import, link rel) cannot be shared. There's been 
>>>>> discussion of adding an api on shadowRoot that says, 'make a given 
>>>>> (potentially document level) stylesheet apply here'.
>>>>>  
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> On Thu, Feb 27, 2014 at 8:58 AM, Justin Merz <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> Sorry if this is a repeat,  most of the Global CSS discussions I have 
>>>>>> found are quite old in comparison to the age of Polymer.  I have an app 
>>>>>> using 50+ polymer-elements and have been using the (now deprecated?) 
>>>>>> applyAuthorStyles to bleed in my apps css.  This has and continues to 
>>>>>> work 
>>>>>> when using the polyfill Shadow Dom.  Recently I have been trying to get 
>>>>>> the 
>>>>>> app working in Canary with 'Experimental Web Platform features' turned 
>>>>>> on. 
>>>>>>  The native Shadow Dom is not allowing and global css to bleed in.  I 
>>>>>> went 
>>>>>> ahead and created a single css file which I imported as <link 
>>>>>> rel="stylesheet"> inside my <template> tags so I would be doing things 
>>>>>> the 
>>>>>> Web Component way. It should be noted that about 40% of my elements are 
>>>>>> now 
>>>>>> accessing the same css file.  This worked great in Canary but tanked 
>>>>>> Polymer in Chrome 33.  Here are my results from some tests:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> -Chrome 33
>>>>>>   Polymer as a fit, spins and spins then either Chrome dies or loads 
>>>>>> after a very intense process (guessing bug?).
>>>>>>
>>>>>> -Chrome 33 vulcanized
>>>>>>   Works.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> -Chrome Canary (35) w/ experimental platform features on
>>>>>>   Works
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I'm interested if there is a proposed solution for global styling.  I 
>>>>>> understand the use case of wanting to encapsulate widgets but throwing 
>>>>>> out 
>>>>>> the use of global css because everything is an elements seems off to me. 
>>>>>>  I'm just using standard libraries such as bootstrap, font-awesome, 
>>>>>> animate.css and it just seems odd that I would have to import every 
>>>>>> global 
>>>>>> css file into every widget or do something like use Grunt to 
>>>>>> pre-compress 
>>>>>> my global css from Bower into a single file (which at least has me only 
>>>>>> importing one stylesheet).  Specially when you are building application 
>>>>>> specific elements that are never intended to live elsewhere.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> So, this all said, what approach should I take?  Is the inclusion of 
>>>>>> a single 'app' css file the way to go in all of my elements and I should 
>>>>>> I 
>>>>>> look to file a bug for Chrome?  I am missing something about allowing 
>>>>>> global css to pass through the Shadow Dom (w/o appending a lot of ^^ to 
>>>>>> standard css libraries)?  Or another option that I am missing? 
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Thanks in advance.  Love the library and all the promise it shows.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>  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/46769bee-b1f2-4c42-bc47-5d1255871f72%
>>>>>> 40googlegroups.com.
>>>>>> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>  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] <javascript:>.
>> To view this discussion on the web visit 
>> https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/polymer-dev/ebde9858-d4be-4051-b8bd-21663a105d18%40googlegroups.com
>> .
>>
>> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
>>
>
>

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/8c28f14b-0c3f-4f24-bd5b-63f928030c2f%40googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.

Reply via email to