On Wed, Apr 25, 2012 at 3:31 PM, Ojan Vafai <[email protected]> wrote:
> <script type=text/html> works for string-based templating. Special > handling of </script> is not a big enough pain to justify adding a template > element. > ... > String-based templating already works. We don't need new API for it. > DOM-based templating and Web Components do need new API in order to work at > all. There's no need, and little benefit, for the template element to try > to meet both use-cases. > Strongly support these two points. If we're writing a template using a custom template language with its own syntax, etc..., it IS a script and I don't see why we would want a new element for it. That use case is elegantly addressed by the script element, which is supported by virtually all major browsers. I even think it's actively harmful to introduce a new element to replace this use case (text-based templates). - Ryosuke
