On Dec 7, 2013, at 11:49 AM, Erik Arvidsson <[email protected]> wrote: > What I think you (and Ryosuke) are trying to do is bundling. If shadow dom > works without custom elements it should be its own spec. If template element > works without shadow dom it should be its own spec. If custom elements work > without shadow dom and templates don't bundle them into one spec.
Being different specifications doesn't warrant two features to be completely separate. If we applied the same argument to XHR, we wouldn't provide mechanism to parse JSON, XML, or HTML just because their respective parsing algorithms are specified elsewhere. That'll be horrible in terms of developer ergonomics. > That said, let a thousand libraries bloom and lets see what cow paths people > create. If it turns out that people end up doing something over and over we > should get that into level 2 of the spec. It appears to me that many custom elements naturally want style isolation provided by shadow DOM and requires some templating mechanism to bootstrap. In fact, Google's own Polymer library uses shadow DOM and template in a declarative syntax: http://www.polymer-project.org/polymer.html#element-declaration Also, I'd like to hear opinions and perspectives of people who are not affiliated with either Apple or Google since the discussion is not going anywhere between us. - R. Niwa
