We wouldn't want to use web components for the reasons you mentioned and
polymer because it uses shadow DOM, where you cannot share css styles.
What would be great is webcomponent-like custom elements that share css,
that's why webcomponents.js <http://webcomponents.org/polyfills/> is used in
this library <http://wikimedia-ui.wmflabs.org/>. It will be much more
accessible for a lot more users if we managed to do similar things to OOjs
UI components with a more approachable language for uses in and out of wiki
like <wiki-icon icon="star" color="green"></wiki-icon>
mm
On Sun, Jan 10, 2016 at 2:54 PM, Prateek Saxena <psaxena(a)wikimedia.org>
wrote:
On Wed, Nov 11, 2015 at 1:59 PM, S Page
<spage(a)wikimedia.org> wrote:
Sure, but how cool would it be if OOjs UI were
expressible as
WebComponent-ish things…
I have been considering the WebComponent approach since before we
decided OOjs UI to be our go to UI library, but it obviously isn't
ready to be our main UI technology. Iteratively adding a WebComponent
layer to OOjs UI shouldn't be hard but I have mixed feelings about it
[1]:
* Lack of support [2]. We'll still need parser tags to consistently
support these tags.
* Maintainability.
* Choice of polyfill and/or library, brick/polymer.
It does solve the UI prototyping problem, but I wonder if its worth the
effort.
—prtksxna
[1] I am super excited about WebComponents but want to hold myself back.
[2]
http://caniuse.com/#search=web%20components
_______________________________________________
Design mailing list
Design(a)lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/design
--
mm