It's seems odd that a library named done-component is centered around a tag called can-component. This results in a bit of confusion at first glance of the relationship between the can-component library & the <can-component> tag. A novice to CanJS looking at a codebase would look at the can-component docs and see no mention of such a tag.
Obviously the library name can-component was already taken, but was there a conscious decision not to make the root tag of a .component file <done-component>?
I propose we add allow .component files to have a root tag of <done-component> while still allowing <can-component> for backwards compatibility. If we did this I'd also suggest updating the docs to use <done-component> in their examples.
matthewp
commented
6 years ago
It's seems odd that a library named
done-componentis centered around a tag calledcan-component. This results in a bit of confusion at first glance of the relationship between thecan-componentlibrary & the<can-component>tag. A novice to CanJS looking at a codebase would look at thecan-componentdocs and see no mention of such a tag.Obviously the library name
can-componentwas already taken, but was there a conscious decision not to make the root tag of a .component file<done-component>?I propose we add allow .component files to have a root tag of
<done-component>while still allowing<can-component>for backwards compatibility. If we did this I'd also suggest updating the docs to use<done-component>in their examples.