Skip to content
This repository has been archived by the owner on May 29, 2019. It is now read-only.

Improved section on registering elements #1479

Closed
wants to merge 3 commits into from

Conversation

mercmobily
Copy link

Hi,

And... here it is. I tried to make the language less "chatty" and did my best to explain exactly what goes on when elements are created.

I also improved it as much as possible. I really think it's a much better section now.

Thank you!

Merc.

@googlebot
Copy link

Thanks for your pull request. It looks like this may be your first contribution to a Google open source project. Before we can look at your pull request, you'll need to sign a Contributor License Agreement (CLA).

📝 Please visit https://cla.developers.google.com/ to sign.

Once you've signed, please reply here (e.g. I signed it!) and we'll verify. Thanks.


  • If you've already signed a CLA, it's possible we don't have your GitHub username or you're using a different email address. Check your existing CLA data and verify that your email is set on your git commits.
  • If you signed the CLA as a corporation, please let us know the company's name.

@mercmobily
Copy link
Author

This is the implementation of #1456 -- basically, I had my questions answered and rewrote the relevant section. Feel free to use it, change it, bit it, whatever :D

@mercmobily
Copy link
Author

(I signed the CLA BTW!)

@googlebot
Copy link

CLAs look good, thanks!

@mercmobily
Copy link
Author

As I wrote on the original ticket:

I would love to also have a section here that explains the practical implications of this. When does it really matter than a child's ready() hasn't yet been called?

Maybe this PR could be improved by somebody at Google who could cover this?

- `created` callback local DOM initialized (This means that **local DOM**
- children are created, their property values are set as specified in the
- template, and `ready()` has been called on them) `ready` callback
- [`factoryImpl` callback](#custom-constructor) `attached` callback

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Formatting looks messed up on this bulleted list.

@googlebot
Copy link

Thanks for your pull request. It looks like this may be your first contribution to a Google open source project. Before we can look at your pull request, you'll need to sign a Contributor License Agreement (CLA).

📝 Please visit https://cla.developers.google.com/ to sign.

Once you've signed, please reply here (e.g. I signed it!) and we'll verify. Thanks.


  • If you've already signed a CLA, it's possible we don't have your GitHub username or you're using a different email address. Check your existing CLA data and verify that your email is set on your git commits.
  • If you signed the CLA as a corporation, please let us know the company's name.

@googlebot googlebot added cla: no and removed cla: yes labels Jan 7, 2016
@mercmobily
Copy link
Author

I am confused... I had already signed the CLA; I re-did it just now, and yet it's saying that it cannot verify my consent?

@googlebot
Copy link

CLAs look good, thanks!

@googlebot googlebot added cla: yes and removed cla: no labels Jan 7, 2016
@mercmobily
Copy link
Author

Something strange happened, but it seems to be all good now.

@robdodson
Copy link
Contributor

CLA bot is crazy bot

@arthurevans
Copy link

LGTM, thanks. I'll do a little massaging after I merge this.

@mercmobily
Copy link
Author

Hi,

Fantastic!

Merc.
On 13 Jan 2016 6:45 am, "Arthur Evans" [email protected] wrote:

LGTM, thanks. I'll do a little massaging after I merge this.


Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub
#1479 (comment).

arthurevans pushed a commit that referenced this pull request Jan 21, 2016
@arthurevans
Copy link

Closing in favor of #1506, which includes these changes and more. (Feel free to review over there.)

Sign up for free to subscribe to this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in.
Labels
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

4 participants