On 12/14/2010 01:24 PM, Dimitri Glazkov wrote:
Dear all,
Looking at the use cases and the problems the current XBL2 spec is
trying address, I think it might be a good idea to rename it into
something that is less legacy-bound? Hixie already cleverly disguised
the "X" as [X]engamous in the latest draft, and if this spec is to
become part of HTML
Is it? That was just a proposal, but I prefer the spec before the
latest editions.
-Olli
, it probably should lose an 'L'. As for 'B',
describing what XBL2 aims to do as 'bindings' ain't super-accurate.
The way I look at it, the problems we're trying to solve are:
a) templating -- for astoundingly fast creation of DOM chunks using
declarative syntax;
b) shadow DOM -- for maximum-pleasure encapsulation and leak-free
component abstraction of DOM chunks;
c) binding -- for joy-filled extension and decoration DOM elements.
Describing all these as just "Binding" just feels wrong. "Web
Components" perhaps or something along these lines?
Who's with me? :)
:DG<
