Translation: instead of providing a good DX we're going to sell Polymer
> The Polymer API is more high level than the Web Components API. This is not by mistake, it's by design.
Indeed. By crappy design with horrible developer experience
> The higher level the Web Components API is, the more difficult it is to use by a large number of wildly different frameworks.
Hmm... How about "let's reduce the need for and dependency on multiple frameworks"? When will that ever be a goal?
> You need a "synced attribute" only for some frameworks, not all.
Surprise, Polymer's API provides a possibility to define that.
> Also, your example is misleading, because the two last methods are only needed to be defined once, so if you want 2 synced properties, the total number of methods is 6, not 8.
Oh. Right. 6, not 8. I wonder if I ever complained about the number of methods required? Nope, what I complained about is the amount of tedious boilerplate you need to write to implement the most basic and common of things.
If I need 1 more synced property/attribute pair, I will need:
- 1 extra setter
- 1 extra getter
- 1 extra item in the attributes list
- 1 extra if clause in the callback.
>> "Bad developer experience." > Use a framework.
How about: platform provides a well-designed API that doesn't require a framework for the most basic and common functionality?
As an example:
- DOM APIs are horrible, and quickly devolve into tedious error-prone boilerplate
- jQuery API is amazing
- Does this mean that DOM APIs suddenly become developer friendly? Does this mean they are beyond any criticism?
Same with WCs