Re: Base Template (Was Re: Minimum viable custom elements)

[Hayato Ito]

Jan,

As for the following, in https://github.com/JanMiksovsky/base-template),
> A web component spec bug
 tried to resolve
this question by fixing the platform, but an initial Blink implementation
 ran into
problems and had to be backed out. This problem is unlikely to be resolved
at the platform level anytime soon,

This is correct.  Although I've not given up speccing and implementing
"shadow as a constructor call for the super class" again,  but it won't
happen anytime soon.

On Sat Feb 14 2015 at 2:46:22 AM Jan Miksovsky 
wrote:

> Dimitri: Okay, I can follow up with Ryosuke. I’m happy to share our
> thoughts and needs for subclassing components.
>
> Anne/Steve: I’d originally indicated that this technique couldn't be
> applied to extending native HTML elements. Since the two of your seemed
> interested in that, I spent some time tinkering with the idea, and it turns
> out that this technique can be made to work for that situation. I’ve posted
> a quick demo (
> http://janmiksovsky.github.io/base-template/extendButton.html) showing
> subclassing of a standard HTML button element. This works best under native
> Shadow DOM. Under polyfilled Shadow DOM, base class styles can’t (yet?) be
> inherited.
>
> Anyway, I mention this in case it opens up some ideas. Thanks for the
> inspiration!
>

Re: Base Template (Was Re: Minimum viable custom elements)

[Jan Miksovsky]

Dimitri: Okay, I can follow up with Ryosuke. I’m happy to share our thoughts 
and needs for subclassing components.

Anne/Steve: I’d originally indicated that this technique couldn't be applied to 
extending native HTML elements. Since the two of your seemed interested in 
that, I spent some time tinkering with the idea, and it turns out that this 
technique can be made to work for that situation. I’ve posted a quick demo 
(http://janmiksovsky.github.io/base-template/extendButton.html 
) showing 
subclassing of a standard HTML button element. This works best under native 
Shadow DOM. Under polyfilled Shadow DOM, base class styles can’t (yet?) be 
inherited.

Anyway, I mention this in case it opens up some ideas. Thanks for the 
inspiration!

Re: Base Template (Was Re: Minimum viable custom elements)

[Dimitri Glazkov]

Ryosuke, Jan,

It might be useful for you two folks to work through Jan's Shadow DOM
composition/inheritance insight (use cases?) together and see how they
could be resolved without having multiple shadow roots per element. I would
love to take advantage of all the work you both have done thinking about
this problem separately.

:DG<

On Thu, Feb 12, 2015 at 9:46 AM, Ryosuke Niwa  wrote:

>
> On Feb 12, 2015, at 4:50 AM, Steve Faulkner 
> wrote:
>
>
> On 12 February 2015 at 10:58, Anne van Kesteren  wrote:
>
>> which is a very different problem from what you want to solve, no?
>
>
> The problem I think needs solving for minimum viable custom elements is
> reducing reliance on bolt-on accessibility. From the example provided
> http://janmiksovsky.github.io/base-template/ it appears that in this
> instance it does achieve that end.
>
> I don't know whether this will extend to other UI controls or whether it
> is a practical solution, which is why I brought it to the list for
> discussion.
>
>
> Again, this proposal or subclassing problem is nothing to do with custom
> elements but all do with shadow DOM.
>
> Ironically, I've pointed out the exact same problem explained in this page
> last April and proposed to change the way shadow DOM works to solve it:
> https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-webapps/2014AprJun/0151.html
>
> - R. Niwa
>
>

Base Template (Was Re: Minimum viable custom elements)

[Ryosuke Niwa]

> On Feb 12, 2015, at 4:50 AM, Steve Faulkner  wrote:
> 
> 
> On 12 February 2015 at 10:58, Anne van Kesteren  > wrote:
> which is a very different problem from what you want to solve, no?
> 
> The problem I think needs solving for minimum viable custom elements is 
> reducing reliance on bolt-on accessibility. From the example provided 
> http://janmiksovsky.github.io/base-template/ 
>  it appears that in this 
> instance it does achieve that end.
> 
> I don't know whether this will extend to other UI controls or whether it is a 
> practical solution, which is why I brought it to the list for discussion.

Again, this proposal or subclassing problem is nothing to do with custom 
elements but all do with shadow DOM.

Ironically, I've pointed out the exact same problem explained in this page last 
April and proposed to change the way shadow DOM works to solve it:
https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-webapps/2014AprJun/0151.html 


- R. Niwa