> On Feb 4, 2015, at 10:12 AM, Brian Kardell <bkard...@gmail.com> wrote: > > On Wed, Feb 4, 2015 at 12:41 PM, Chris Bateman <chrisb...@gmail.com > <mailto:chrisb...@gmail.com>> wrote: > Yeah, I had noted in that post that wrapping a native element with a custom > element was an option - only drawback is that the markup isn't as terse > (which is generally advertised as one of the selling points of Custom > Elements). But that doesn't seem like a deal breaker to me, if subclassing > needs to be postponed. > > Chris > > > As I pointed out ealier: > > <input is="x-foo"> > > <x-foo><input></x-foo> > > seems like barely a ternseness savings worth discussing.
Indeed. Also, authors are used to the idea of including a fallback content inside an element after canvas and object elements and this fits well with their mental model. - R. Niwa
