[Bug 13913] Attributes don't have an order

2016-04-13 Thread bugzilla
https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=13913 Anne changed: What|Removed |Added Status|REOPENED|RESOLVED

[Custom Elements] Not requiring hyphens in names.

2016-04-13 Thread /#!/JoePea
I personally don't like this limitation. I think Custom Elements would be better if we could create elements that have , with the possible exception that we can't override the native elements. Based on my previous email about registering elements on shadow roots, I think being able to choose

Re: [Custom Elements] Not requiring hyphens in names.

2016-04-13 Thread Nick Dugger
I personal don't mind the hyphenation requirement for custom elements. Tab Atkins brings up a great point about ensuring that new elements will be able to be added to spec without worry of name conflicts with existing custom elements on the page. It's much more future proof, in my opinion. On

Re: [Custom Elements] Not requiring hyphens in names.

2016-04-13 Thread /#!/JoePea
What if custom Elements simply override existing ones then? ```js shadowRoot.registerElement('div', MyElement) ``` If overriding native elements was documented, it'd be fine. By default, a blank document or shadow root has no elements registered, so would use the native DIV. But, why not let

Re: [Custom Elements] Not requiring hyphens in names.

2016-04-13 Thread Tab Atkins Jr.
On Wed, Apr 13, 2016 at 12:33 PM, /#!/JoePea wrote: > What if custom Elements simply override existing ones then? > > ```js > shadowRoot.registerElement('div', MyElement) > ``` That means we lose the lingua franca that HTML provides; two independent libraries can't ever depend

Re: [Custom Elements] Not requiring hyphens in names.

2016-04-13 Thread Tab Atkins Jr.
On Wed, Apr 13, 2016 at 11:12 AM, /#!/JoePea wrote: > I personally don't like this limitation. I think Custom Elements would > be better if we could create elements that have > , with the possible exception that we can't override the > native elements. This would prevent