To me CustomElements V1 is the API that would have benefited most from origin trials. It was specced unpolyfillable (relying on ES6 syntax) which real dev exposure would have immediately found. Classic failure of backroom standardizationhttps://twitter.com/slightlylate/status/1139626438766673920?s=19 …
-
-
Replying to @cramforce
Several things need to be corrected here. First, Custom Elements are very much polyfillable. We have a polyfill that works great on browsers without native support. That's not the problem.
1 reply 1 retweet 11 likes -
Replying to @justinfagnani @cramforce
The problem is that the *native* implementation doesn't work out-of-the-box with compiled classes. We vend a shim that fixes that, though it's a very unique and annoying problem.
1 reply 0 retweets 7 likes -
Replying to @justinfagnani @cramforce
Second, this is absolutely not the result of backroom standardization. The class-based design was proposed in public by Apple, discussed in public face-to-face meetings attended by Google, Apple, Microsoft, Mozilla, and frameworks like Ember and Polymer, and refined in GH issues.
2 replies 0 retweets 12 likes -
Replying to @justinfagnani @cramforce
Really though, this is incorrect, and it's a shame that it's stated and getting likes like it's fact . What part of requiring classes do you think was worked out in a backroom? Classes, constructors, and created callbacks were discussed at both 2015 meetings that hammered out v1
1 reply 1 retweet 6 likes -
Replying to @justinfagnani
I think of those meetings as backroom: public and publicized aren't the same thing.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @cramforce
They were official W3C Webapps Working Group meetings with a chair present, minutes, public agenda, irc, and phone bridge, all browser vendors, most major frameworks (Angular was there too, React invited but declined), and invited experts present. What more could be done?
2 replies 0 retweets 5 likes -
Replying to @justinfagnani
Involve developers. "Fuck it, we'll ship whatever Apple wants to get this over with" is a strategy I empathize with but that doesn't always yield ideal outcomes.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @cramforce
Like I said, there were representatives from Ember, Angular, Polymer, and individual invited experts. Other frameworks didn't show.
1 reply 0 retweets 3 likes -
Replying to @justinfagnani @cramforce
Some vendors having veto power for all web features on their platform is kind of a separate issue. It wasn't very private that they wouldn't ship if they didn't get their way on certain things. They just said it in the public meetings.
1 reply 0 retweets 2 likes
...and nearly every single time, we rolled over like a cheap canoe. The revisionist history being sold today is a thing of gobstopping audacity.
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.
& Web Standards TL; Blink API OWNER
Named PWAs w/
DMs open. Tweets my own; press@google.com for official comms.