Custom element upgrades aren't always synchronous. Even w/ vulcanization,
you'll still want to wait for WebComponentsReady.

On Thu, Mar 26, 2015 at 9:20 PM, Kiran Rao <[email protected]> wrote:

> @rajsite,
>
> In my experiments, I found that WebComponentsReady is still required -
> that's how you know that your custom element has been registered and is
> safe to interact with. However, I had other issues related to Template not
> being available (if I eliminate the HTML Imports polyfill that is). Check
> out the bug I referred to in my response to Rob above for more details.
>
>
> On Friday, 27 March 2015 08:09:47 UTC+5:30, [email protected] wrote:
>>
>> It also seems that HTML Imports use the WebComponentsReady event due to
>> the polyfill limitation of not being able to block on scripts in the main
>> page during imports: http://webcomponents.org/polyfills/html-imports/
>>
>> 1. Does that mean if we vulcanize that relying on WebComponentsReady is
>> unnecessary?
>>
>> 2. Following that, if Polymer and Polymer element registrations are being
>> loaded synchronously due to vulcanization does that mean we also do not
>> need to wait for polymer-ready assuming the DOM is ready?
>>
>> 3. The million dollar question: With vulcanization does that mean I can
>> switch back to a "VanillaJS" way of detecting DOM ready state such as
>> waiting for DOMContentLoaded?
>>
>> 4. I'm having difficulty finding documentation to back this up but was
>> the goal for native web components (utilizing HTML Imports, Shadow DOM,
>> Custom Elements, HTML Templates, the works!) to expect that all web
>> components (that don't rely on programmatic lazy importing) are registered
>> and upgraded for DOMContentLoaded?
>>
>> On Tuesday, March 17, 2015 at 2:40:54 PM UTC-5, Rob Dodson wrote:
>>>
>>> +ajo
>>>
>>> On Tue, Mar 3, 2015 at 2:51 AM, Kiran Rao <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>
>>>> @Rob,
>>>>
>>>> I wonder whether my assumption is correct in the first place. It would
>>>> be good to get the folks developing the core polyfills to weigh in. See
>>>> also this bug
>>>> <https://github.com/webcomponents/webcomponentsjs/issues/45> on
>>>> webcomponentsjs repo.
>>>>
>>>> On Sunday, 1 March 2015 01:45:02 UTC+5:30, Rob Dodson wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> Good question. I know that elements have access to Polymer.import and
>>>>> may potentially lazy load more elements this way. +dfreedman do you know 
>>>>> if
>>>>> any polymer elements (or polymer itself) take advantage of Polymer.import
>>>>> at any point?
>>>>>
>>>>> On Wed, Feb 25, 2015 at 2:09 AM, Kiran Rao <[email protected]>
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> It looks like the HTML Import polyfill is redundant if vulcanize is
>>>>>> used to either inline or otherwise squash all the custom elements into a
>>>>>> single script. Essentially, HTML imports are replaced with a script 
>>>>>> import.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Is this assessment correct? Am I missing something here?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I tried creating a version of webcomponents-lite.js minus the HTML
>>>>>> imports and the size went further down to ~16 KB minified (~5.6KB 
>>>>>> gzipped).
>>>>>> For comparison, webcomponents-lite is ~28KB minified (~9KB gzipped).
>>>>>> If HTML imports are truly redundant after vulcanizing, maybe we could
>>>>>> request inclusion of a webcomponents-feather version of the polyfills 
>>>>>> that
>>>>>> include only Custom Elements and Templates.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> 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/bef0c60d-a49d-4043-83c8-25727aff8408%40googl
>>>>>> egroups.com
>>>>>> <https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/polymer-dev/bef0c60d-a49d-4043-83c8-25727aff8408%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/9b71c215-d4e6-4d74-8a91-ce63de27a554%
>>>> 40googlegroups.com
>>>> <https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/polymer-dev/9b71c215-d4e6-4d74-8a91-ce63de27a554%40googlegroups.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer>
>>>> .
>>>>
>>>> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
>>>>
>>>
>>>


-- 
AJ Ortega | Software Engineer | [email protected] | 626-872-5064

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/CAKf8-xgDfCaDjxXJa3eGS7CyeGxz-CDakWDntNmoC40pHbJQEg%40mail.gmail.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Reply via email to