-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 81
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Add Invoker Commands API #2411
base: main
Are you sure you want to change the base?
Add Invoker Commands API #2411
Conversation
Add into the list of features Invoker Commands. You can find explainer related to this here: - https://open-ui.org/components/invokers.explainer/ And CanIUse links: - https://caniuse.com/mdn-api_commandevent - https://caniuse.com/mdn-api_commandevent_source - https://caniuse.com/mdn-api_commandevent_command - https://caniuse.com/mdn-html_elements_button_command - https://caniuse.com/mdn-html_elements_button_commandfor - https://caniuse.com/mdn-api_htmlbuttonelement_command - https://caniuse.com/mdn-api_htmlbuttonelement_commandforelement
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Thanks for submitting! I think this will be blocked until the spec is merged (or we are able to more comprehensively account for future features.
@@ -0,0 +1,12 @@ | |||
name: Invoker Commands | |||
description: Adding commandfor and command attributes to elements would allow to assign interactions in a more accessible and declarative way, while reducing bugs and simplifying the amount of JavaScript pages are required to ship for interactivity. | |||
spec: https://open-ui.org/components/invokers.explainer/ |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I think this PR will be blocked until the spec is merged in whatwg/html#9841, and then we can link to that.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
So no explainers or drafts as a spec link?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
It's OK to link to other things if there's no better link, but you have to create an exception and document when we ought to remove the exception:
Lines 23 to 27 in fe74fdd
const defaultAllowlist: allowlistItem[] = [ | |
// [ | |
// "https://example.com/spec/", | |
// "Allowed because…. Remove this exception when https://example.com/org/repo/pull/1234 merges." | |
// ] |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
@ddbeck should this be something we discuss as a potential future improvement? As we head into a new phase of the project where we focus more on bleeding-edge features, we'll very frequently run into this case where features only have early explainers, and no specs.
I have a feeling that adding to the specs.ts file everytime might not scale then.
Maybe open a new discussion issue?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Yeah, I think you're right that it won't be scalable. I'd welcome an issue on this. I think it's part of a general question along the lines of, "what's the ideal workflow for features before they ship and standardize?"
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
See #2433
Co-authored-by: James Stuckey Weber <[email protected]>
Add into the list of features Invoker Commands.
You can find explainer related to this here:
And CanIUse links: