On 7/8/2011 1:18 PM, Dimitri Glazkov wrote:
As a background for the wider Component Model discussion, I put
together an overview of the general behavior attachment problem on the
Web:
http://wiki.whatwg.org/wiki/Behavior_Attachment
Please take a look. Comments, additions, and critique are appreciated.
:DG<
First, I like the overview, I think it helps clear up a lot of issues.
And it raises lots of questions, which is also good ;-).
I'm not quite connecting the dots. Behavior attachment is needed, your
examples demonstrate that. You claim the missing facility is atomic
component addition and proper encapsulation. Perhaps this is well known,
but I think it would be helpful to explicitly explain why organized
behavior attachment requires encapsulation. Actually I think a better
approach is to explain why/how behavior attachment with encapsulation
will be better, cheap, faster. A small example would be helpful
(perhaps later in the document).
Your introduction highlights encapsulation. However, it seems to me that
encapsulation is secondary to componentization: the critical step is to
have a way to group HTML/CSS/JS in to a unit that can be developed
independently and then be used without reference to the implementation.
Encapsulation in the the OO sense adds constraints that enforce the
boundaries. It's great and maybe even critical but not primary.
The examples sections are great, perhaps some experts will correct some
details but your overall approach here is excellent.
The Behavior Attachment Methods section is also super, but at the end I
was puzzled. I thought the Shadow DOM proposal only allowed one binding,
and thus it would exclude exactly the Decorator pattern we need to
compose multiple frameworks. I understand how you can solve the Dojo or
Sencha or jQuery problem better, but I don't see how you can solve the
'and' version.
HTH,
jjb
