+public-nextweb _ i encourage folks there to check out [email protected] this conversation is deep and multi-forked and I am late to the party.
On Dec 7, 2013 4:44 PM, "Brendan Eich" <[email protected]> wrote: > > What does polymer do? Cows are already treading paths. > > I still smell a chance to do better out of the gate (gave, thanks autospellcheck! lol). Call me picky. Knee-jerking about scenario solving (I think I taught Yehuda that one) doesn't help. Particular response, please. > > /be > I think the most important part is to first ensure that we -can- explain the magic with core apis even if they are initially saltier than we'd all like. When reasonable opportunities present themselves to improve developer ergonomics, we should take them - it doesn't preclude other opportunities for better flowers to bloom. The issues in this specific case in my mind surround the observation that it feels like it is attempting to bind several layers together which are in various states of "done" and conceptually what we have is more like a squirrel path than a cow path on this piece. Without bindings or some kind of pattern for solving those use cases, template is a less thing - and i think we are far from that. Templates aren't necessary for a useful document.register(). Shadow DOM isn't either but it's more obvious where the connections are and it seems considerably more stable. There also isn't necessarily a 1:1 relationship of component to template, so we have to be careful there lest we add confusion. Is this really a ShadowHost? I am not actually sure that the initial message in this thread really needs to have anything particular to the template element though, it looks like the optional third argument could be any Node - and that does actually seem to describe a useful and common pattern which we could easily explain in existing terms and it might be fruitful to think about that.
