Hacker News new | ask | show | jobs
by mapreduce 879 days ago
Is this behavior specified by the standard? Any links to the relevant section?
2 comments

The custom element specification (section 4.13) deals mostly with the registration and usage details, but the general extensibility section earlier on covers the basic use case: https://html.spec.whatwg.org/multipage/infrastructure.html#e...

"User agents must treat elements and attributes that they do not understand as semantically neutral; leaving them in the DOM (for DOM processors), and styling them according to CSS (for CSS processors), but not inferring any meaning from them."

Yes. It means they are not "custom elements". They are basically divs.
Yes, they are basically divs, but with a semantic name. Which is exactly what we wanted to achieve.
It's quite literally not what we were trying to achieve.
How else would you want custom elements to work?
What we're discussing are not custom elements. If you rename a div into <some-other-name>, it doesn't make that a custom element.

Very quite literally in the very literal sense of the word the only way to create actual custom elements is through javascript. There's no other way.

A sibling comment posted this link: https://codepen.io/dkoch-org/pen/yLwPVYG. And this is not custom elements. These are "elements unknown to the browser which will be treated in a neutral way making them indistinguishable from divs/spans". In the context of "preventing div/span soup" this does absolutely nothing. It's the same soup, just with longer names.

More like span, since the default is inline
Ah. For some reason I misremembered that the default is block.
You don't need a standard if it works in most browsers. And that's worked fine for me on nearly a dozen enterprise web apps since ~1995