I fully agree Ryan - thanks for posting.
On Tue, Apr 29, 2014 at 7:23 PM, 'Scott Miles' via Polymer < [email protected]> wrote: > Well said and 100% correct IMO. > > > On Mon, Apr 28, 2014 at 6:12 AM, <[email protected]> wrote: > >> To the notion that the OP and others brought up regarding the desire for >> people to 'not use Web Components to make the whole site'... isn't that the >> point? Turning the entire application into granular, reusable, well >> encapsulated components that can be easily composed into larger specialized >> components in a declarative manner is pretty much the whole idea here. For >> me, that's been the promise of the web platform all along, and the great >> frameworks embrace this (Enyo, Facebook React, Polymer, X-tags). Markup is >> a natural expression layer for this compositional way of working. Enyo >> achieves their declarative composition with JSON mixed into the component's >> imperative declaration, and that's fine too, but the beauty of using markup >> is that you can easily embed and compose at the document level. That's >> HUGE! Please don't view that as even remotely a negative. Being able to >> compose semantic markup (that comes with rich functionality) at the >> document level brings clarity to the web development process. It brings the >> expression of what you want the app to do closer to the implementation of >> making it happen. >> >> Not only do I think people should be embracing this, I can attest to the >> power of doing so. Before Web Components was a glean in the collective eyes >> of the W3C, I have been using one widget/component based framework or the >> other, often writing my own (https://github.com/theVolary/feather). Once >> you get practiced in thinking through how to break the application up into >> small chunks of compose-able functionality, you will be pleasantly >> surprised at just how often you get to reuse your components in contexts >> other than the one you initial created it for. It also becomes a heck of a >> lot easier to re-organize things when requirements change. >> >> There is nothing wrong with markup, nor with using a component based >> approach to create the entire application. >> >> >> On Friday, April 25, 2014 1:35:22 PM UTC-5, Rob Dodson wrote: >> >>> You can look at the content of an import using the dev tools >>> >>> >>> On Fri, Apr 25, 2014 at 11:07 AM, <[email protected]> wrote: >>> >>>> Hey all, great discussion! I totally agree with Patrick's Point #2 >>>> I learnt more from viewing source of how a big website implements cool >>>> effects than reading tutorials on the internet. Is it possible that the >>>> HTML imports being used can be viewed as well? >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> On Thursday, April 3, 2014 11:24:03 PM UTC+5:30, Rob Dodson wrote: >>>> >>>>> re: point no. 2 >>>>> >>>>> This is already the case today. Here's a screenshot of the markup >>>>> generated by >>>>> gmail<http://html5-demos.appspot.com/static/cds2013/index.html#19>. >>>>> That code is the byproduct of some framework just spitting out DOM as a >>>>> substrate. So they're already sort of obfuscating but hopefully you >>>>> wouldn't need to spew out all of that DOM if whatever they were building >>>>> was just encapsulated in Shadow DOM and wrapped in a Custom Element. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> On Wed, Apr 2, 2014 at 3:15 PM, <[email protected]> wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> My opinion on Web Components has two sides. >>>>>> >>>>>> 1. HTML is about being accessible to *everyone* and as a self-taught >>>>>> programmer I believe the div soup is inaccessible to people who are >>>>>> interested in how a website works (Don't tell me you haven't been there >>>>>> before. I've learned so many things from Cmd+Opt+U) or even new coworkers >>>>>> who have to an encyclopedia and an expert to understand how a site is >>>>>> laid >>>>>> out before he can do anything, just look at this page. d >>>>>> *iv>div>div...forever...* >>>>>> >>>>>> 2. I'm worried devs will make tags that totally obfuscate their code >>>>>> for performance gains or to make it unreadable to outsiders (opposite of >>>>>> an >>>>>> open web see #1 above). Imagine if Google was filled with tags along the >>>>>> lines of <g-weibvlqbeqbiubqkjdbiuqbek> that only Google can understand. >>>>>> This has serious ramifications beyond my programmer-friendly point in >>>>>> terms >>>>>> of accessibility, SEO , etc. Its important to remember that HTML should >>>>>> be >>>>>> readable and comprhenible without a user-agent stylesheet hiding the tags >>>>>> and stuff. >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> On Sunday, October 20, 2013 10:57:41 AM UTC-5, Rob Dodson wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>> I think the most frequent gripe I hear about Web Components is that >>>>>>> they look like XML and that totally freaks people out. I can definitely >>>>>>> imagine my own horror if I were to open up a client project and top to >>>>>>> bottom was all custom elements that I knew nothing about. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> My own opinion is that they're almost like jQuery plugins. I don't >>>>>>> see much difference in: >>>>>>> >>>>>>> <div class="fancy-dropdown"></div> >>>>>>> $('.fancy-dropdown').dropdown(); >>>>>>> >>>>>>> and >>>>>>> >>>>>>> <fancy-dropdown></fancy-dropdown> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> and just like jQuery plugins, they're great if used in moderation >>>>>>> but *horrible* if they constitute the bulk of your site. I realize >>>>>>> that's not a very accurate analogy but I think it gets at my main point >>>>>>> which is "If it does something mysterious then don't overuse it." >>>>>>> >>>>>>> I figure in time some custom elements might become so commonplace >>>>>>> that they achieve the same level of mindshare as seeing $ or .btn does >>>>>>> today. Bootstrap is a good example. If I opened a document and saw >>>>>>> <twbs-btn> then I could say "Oh! I know how Bootstrap buttons work. OK, >>>>>>> moving on...". So my hope is that the good stuff will rise to the top >>>>>>> and >>>>>>> the best practice will be "liberally use the good stuff, but go easy on >>>>>>> the >>>>>>> esoteric or lesser known elements." >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Does that make sense? What do you guys think? >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> 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/40653bc6-0d68-47a0-90e9-7d484d4958f4%40googl >>>>>> egroups.com<https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/polymer-dev/40653bc6-0d68-47a0-90e9-7d484d4958f4%40googlegroups.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer> >>>>>> . >>>>>> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. >>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> 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/a9e3c6c4-813e-4f90-846b-784bfdf73da6% >>>> 40googlegroups.com<https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/polymer-dev/a9e3c6c4-813e-4f90-846b-784bfdf73da6%40googlegroups.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer> >>>> . >>>> >>>> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. >>>> >>> >>> 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/2cbd0bde-d7b6-4c68-acad-026cc30b474e%40googlegroups.com<https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/polymer-dev/2cbd0bde-d7b6-4c68-acad-026cc30b474e%40googlegroups.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer> >> . >> >> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. >> > > 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/lzvaDViB_Ow/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/CAHbmOLbPH%3DywkXbbjekd_3%3DUxeVNR%2BTFesdkNHYiG165rgNuiw%40mail.gmail.com<https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/polymer-dev/CAHbmOLbPH%3DywkXbbjekd_3%3DUxeVNR%2BTFesdkNHYiG165rgNuiw%40mail.gmail.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer> > . > > For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. > 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/CALTdk8b2oih-6GkzgwxOM-eYwLvVE0%2B9nV5qG-do%3DT5vOGOmaw%40mail.gmail.com. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
