3 ms·
On one hand, I worry that Google is monopolizing the future of the web, but on another, I'm glad because they are effective at producing the features that us de
by zghst 12y ago
On one hand, I worry that Google is monopolizing the future of the web, but on another, I'm glad because they are effective at producing the features that us developers want.
I have mixed feelings about Polymer, currently its high browser requirements make it too radical to use at work (IE, Firefox & Safari be broken yo), but forward enough to get me experimenting with it on my personal projects. At the workplace, I'll continue to stick to React.
- malandrew 12y agoI love the look and feel that went into the design of Material here, but with respect to web components, we should be worried that Google is monopolizing the future of the web. See my comment below: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=7947119 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=7947119 It bugs me that Polymer is being marketed as "polyfills", since the term polyfill generally tends to connote something that fills in for an already agreed upon w3c standard that will appear in all user agents eventually. Whereas web components and shadow dom is still very much in the proposal/experimentation stage and has a ways to go before reaching standardization. There are still some disagreements to be resolved by all those that contribute code to the major user agents. Calling polymer a polyfills library is misleading and an abuse of the intent of the term polyfill [0]. Also related: "Apple Removes Shadow DOM from Safari"[1][2] [0] http://remysharp.com/2010/10/08/what-is-a-polyfill/ http://remysharp.com/2010/10/08/what-is-a-polyfill/ [1] http://trac.webkit.org/changeset/164131 http://trac.webkit.org/changeset/164131 [2] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=7243122 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=7243122