Hi Eric,

Thanks for the clarification. I guess I'll stick with webcomponents-lite.js 
then.

On Wednesday, 8 April 2015 21:41:35 UTC+5:30, Eric Bidelman wrote:
>
> In 0.5, if you fully vulcanize the elements into index.html then yes, you 
> could probably get by without the HTML Imports poyfill. However, this also 
> means any future HTML Import wouldn't work in a polyfill'd browser. As Rob 
> said, lazy-loaded imports are a possibility or components that call 
> Polymer.import. 
>
> In Polymer 0.8, defining 
> <https://www.polymer-project.org/0.8/docs/devguide/registering-elements.html#register-element>
>  
> an element in the main page is not current supported. It needs to be in a 
> separate HTML Import. For that reason I think we'll need to keep the HTML 
> Imports polyfill around for a while. 10KB is worth it!
>
> On Wed, Apr 8, 2015 at 2:40 AM Kiran Rao <[email protected] 
> <javascript:>> wrote:
>
>> +ajo,
>>
>> Any inputs on the necessity of the HTML Import polyfill after 
>> vulcanization?
>>
>>
>> On Friday, 27 March 2015 22:16:39 UTC+5:30, AJ Ortega wrote:
>>
>>> 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%40googlegroups.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] <javascript:>.
>> To view this discussion on the web visit 
>> https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/polymer-dev/137a7696-8fe1-410c-b1ec-91ef4aa22fe0%40googlegroups.com
>>  
>> <https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/polymer-dev/137a7696-8fe1-410c-b1ec-91ef4aa22fe0%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/96ea2a55-fcc5-4c86-ad1e-ff8dc8780ad6%40googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Reply via email to