I was asking wether polymer's custom elements are indistinguishable from normal elements, making them comparable with Ember, or wether there was something else going on that makes the different. If I was not clear, I apologize. I wasn't asking about data binding, because Ember can two-way data bind with any HTML element. Thanks for Answering my question!!
> On Nov 14, 2014, at 1:31 PM, Christopher Dumas <[email protected]> > wrote: > > I was asking wether polymer's custom elements are indistinguishable from > normal elements, making them comparable with Ember, or wether there was > something else going on that makes the different. If I was not clear, I > apologize. I wasn't asking about data binding, because Ember can two-way data > bind with any HTML element. Thanks for Answering my question!! >> On Nov 12, 2014, at 2:52 PM, Igor Minar <[email protected] >> <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: >> >> It's not quite that simple but I think that both of you are right. >> >> In an ideal case, the custom element should be indistinguishable from a >> native element. >> >> The problems start when frameworks and libraries make assumptions about DOM >> that were true before custom elements, but are no longer valid now. >> >> For example, in the past creating an element could have been done without >> worrying about any side effects because most of the html elements are >> lightweight. With custom elements, nobody knows what happens when an element >> is instantiated and bad things might happen if the framework creates an >> element just for bookkeeping purposes, creates it too early, pools elements >> or does other things where the were harmless with native elements, but with >> custom elements could result in bad side-effects. >> >> Another issue are assumptions about behavior of global and boolean >> attributes in DOM. Something that was not an issue before custom elements, >> but as we've already seen is an issue now. >> >> The data-binding aspect of interop is a completely different story and just >> as before the issue is that in the past it was sufficient to bind to >> attributes, but with custom elements you quickly start hitting walls if you >> go down this path. >> >> I expect that if they haven't already, sooner or later Ember will come >> across similar issues as those that Angular came across already. >> >> \i >> >> On Wed Nov 12 2014 at 2:35:19 PM 'Matthew McNulty' via Polymer >> <[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: >> If your framework allows for the use of standard HTML elements, it will also >> work with custom elements in supported browsers, modulo bugs or >> optimizations that don't take the very existence of new HTML tags into >> account. >> >> If your framework requires coordination from within the boundaries of an >> element to an outside orchestrator via non-standard APIs (read: not >> properties, attributes, events, and children), it's not that simple. >> >> Custom elements have the same API surface area as native elements. >> >> Having some sort of component system that could describe a non-standard API >> such that any component could work with some non-standard orchestration >> system that isn't the DOM is a completely separate question. >> >> -Matt >> >> On Wed, Nov 12, 2014 at 2:16 PM, Rob Eisenberg <[email protected] >> <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: >> Once again, I restate what I said before: custom elements are not >> necessarily compatible with any framework. >> >> The original poster is asking about Ember and Handlebars. He's not asking >> about basic DOM capabilities like attributes, properties, etc. The fact that >> there is no standard for data-binding is an important part of the "any >> framework" aspect of the question. The poster wants to know if he can use >> custom elements with any framework and have it all work correctly, >> especially frameworks that support databinding like Ember. The answer to >> that question is no. Some things might work, others might not. It will >> probably depend on the framework. As I said, it won't work correctly with >> Angular 1.x. If that isn't a concrete example, I'm not sure what is. Now, >> I'm less familiar with Ember, so I'm not sure if they have that problem as >> well. Maybe not. >> >> Incidentally, the problem isn't a lack of a databinding standard. The >> problem is that the web components spec doesn't include any notion of >> metadata or self-describing components. Many would say that is an essential >> aspect of any component system. I've worked with many component systems over >> the years and web components is the first that seems to be missing that >> piece. If that were added to HTML, then it would be much easier to build >> binding systems like Angular's and Ember's and to ensure they work properly >> with anything. A lot of other interesting things would also be possible, of >> course. >> >> On Wednesday, November 12, 2014 4:56:08 PM UTC-5, Scott Miles wrote: >> >> Actually, no, custom elements are most definitely not theoretically >> >> compatible with any framework >> >> This is not accurate from our perspective. Custom elements are fundamentally >> indistinguishable from native elements and therefore work in any DOM context. >> >> >> This is one of several reasons that Angular has to make big breaking >> >> changes in 2.0 and why other libraries with databinding support will >> >> probably follow in some fashion or another. >> >> There is no standard for data-binding. >> >> One can say, Angular doesn't support data-binding to Custom Elements, but >> this is no fault of Custom Elements. >> >> It might also be true to say, Polymer's data-binding doesn't support >> framework X. This also has nothing to do with Custom Elements, and again >> reflects only the lack of a data-binding standard. >> >> Custom Elements support attributes, properties, events, and children, the >> same as native elements. >> >> Scott >> >> On Wed, Nov 12, 2014 at 5:26 AM, Rob Eisenberg <[email protected] >> <>> wrote: >> Actually, no, custom elements are most definitely not theoretically >> compatible with any framework. Not out of the box at least. This is one of >> several reasons that Angular has to make big breaking changes in 2.0 and why >> other libraries with databinding support will probably follow in some >> fashion or another. >> >> On Tuesday, November 11, 2014 5:49:31 PM UTC-5, Eric Bidelman wrote: >> Theoretically, custom elements are compatible with any framework. >> >> https://www.polymer-project.org/docs/start/customelements.html#interop >> <https://www.polymer-project.org/docs/start/customelements.html#interop> >> >> On Wed, Nov 12, 2014 at 9:18 AM, Christopher Dumas <[email protected] <>> >> wrote: >> I am a huge fan of Google's Material Design (and I think Polymer is >> really cool), and also of Ember.JS. I was interested to know whether you >> plan to have compatibility with Ember.JS. To clarify: I was hoping that >> Polymer might at least play nicely with Ember and Handlebars. Keep up the >> good work! >> >> Follow Polymer on Google+: plus.google.com/107187849809354688692 >> <http://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/CD4C3C6E-FA6D-466E-ADAA-A3732FDBFE42%40me.com >> >> <https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/polymer-dev/CD4C3C6E-FA6D-466E-ADAA-A3732FDBFE42%40me.com>. >> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout >> <https://groups.google.com/d/optout>. >> >> >> Follow Polymer on Google+: plus.google.com/107187849809354688692 >> <http://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/6fd8b32c-975f-4f65-89bd-5128db29d8bd%40googlegroups.com >> >> <https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/polymer-dev/6fd8b32c-975f-4f65-89bd-5128db29d8bd%40googlegroups.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer>. >> >> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout >> <https://groups.google.com/d/optout>. >> >> >> Follow Polymer on Google+: plus.google.com/107187849809354688692 >> <http://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] >> <mailto:[email protected]>. >> To view this discussion on the web visit >> https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/polymer-dev/f4da903e-e2df-4c3a-96f8-9bd3cddb666a%40googlegroups.com >> >> <https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/polymer-dev/f4da903e-e2df-4c3a-96f8-9bd3cddb666a%40googlegroups.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer>. >> >> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout >> <https://groups.google.com/d/optout>. >> >> >> Follow Polymer on Google+: plus.google.com/107187849809354688692 >> <http://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] >> <mailto:[email protected]>. >> To view this discussion on the web visit >> https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/polymer-dev/CAKrkLHpQtsD9d8fqkmBqpBZzBavPBt%2B1wekJW7cD02wX97KBVA%40mail.gmail.com >> >> <https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/polymer-dev/CAKrkLHpQtsD9d8fqkmBqpBZzBavPBt%2B1wekJW7cD02wX97KBVA%40mail.gmail.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer>. >> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout >> <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/5E2C42FA-23A6-4633-82BB-5A57F5ECF429%40me.com. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
