Some questions about polymer1.0

[Peng Kim]

Hi,Polymer team

I was so exciting when i saw the brand new official version 1.0  of Polymer ,Thanks to the Polymer team for bringing us so amazing stuff.I cant wait trying it out for my big project.But I want to eliminate my worries and doubts before utilize it in my project.

1,What about the compatibility?does it work great on IE7-11?safari5+?chrome*?firefox*?opera*?and even in mobile built-in browser?

2,Can this version be used for social networking website or e-commerce website for a company?

3,I want to use it with Angularjs,what is the best practice to work well with Angularjs?

Thanks in advanced,Any reply will be appreciated!

Peng 

Best Regards

[Eric Eslinger]

I am not on the polymer team, but in my own experience:

1) polymer works well (especially polymer 1.0 with the new shady dom) on modern browsers; like last two versions of stuff. So not IE8, but it works on IE11 in my experience. It doesn't run well (or at all) on the old stock android browser, but mobile chrome / safari run it fine on modern phones.

3) Angularjs works just fine with polymer when polymer is in full shadow-dom mode, but that introduces browser slowness and some incompatibilities. In shady DOM mode, (see my earlier thread) at the current time, angular's DOM manipulation functions (ng-if, ng-repeat, etc) will alter the DOM without telling polymer that the DOM was just altered, which can potentially lead to errors in class isolation, where the css classes don't get distributed properly to newly-added stuff.

e

Follow Polymer on Google+: plus.google.com/107187849809354688692
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Polymer" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to polymer-dev...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/polymer-dev/1d345c35-6758-4393-9a23-d2c4c3a919a4%40googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

[Peng Kim]

Hi,Eric

Thanks for replying

I think we have reason to cut out IE browser,because it is passed ,MS has published a new browser Edge which is isolated from IE, and this is new era of web,we should think about the future.Because I'm from China,and my customers are almost Chinese,So,in addition to the popular browsers like chrome,Firefox,safari,opera,etc,we have our own browsers which is based on chrome V8 engine,but they are quite different from chrome on displaying or anything compatibility stuff,so,it is quite hard to me to make decision.

I found AngularJS has its own Material design libs,https://material.angularjs.org  ,what is the differences between Polymer and  Materialize http://materializecss.com/ , when you choose what Material design libs work with Angular,why Polymer?not angular materializer or something else?

Peng

Best Regards

[王納米]

Hi Peng,

About your last question, AFAIK, material design is just a design spec, angular-material and paper-elements are two different implementations. Polymer itself does nothing about it.

NanoWANG

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/polymer-dev/bd97d9fe-2c97-41ff-b136-228bcacf6b0d%40googlegroups.com.

[Eric Eslinger]

Yes. Angular-material is good if you already use angular, and does not use webcomponents to implement the design spec. Notably, if you use angular, you should use angular-material as the newer polymer shady / local dom implementation does not look to be out-of-the-box compatible with angular (both libraries do dom manipulation, but polymer requires all dom manipulation to go through its local dom api, see my other thread about this). 

MaterializeCSS is a nice material design implementation (I haven't used it for anything real, but I did run through some demo code with it to see how it works) that is also not webcomponents-based. Furthermore, MaterializeCSS doesn't use flexbox for layouts, and does have a jquery dependency for its javascript controls.

So: they're all different approaches to the material design spec. Materialize is the most agnostic in terms of the rest of your framework, ngMaterial is an angular-only thing, and paper-components are built on polymer/webcomponents. Depends on the rest of your application.

e

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/polymer-dev/CANnpEN_FH1fQFVLpxrZHu-CVSg1Kv-ZLKsG-RVeLGW%3Du7EgwkA%40mail.gmail.com.

[Justin Fagnani]

On Tue, Jun 2, 2015 at 8:47 AM, Eric Eslinger <eric.e...@gmail.com> wrote:

Yes. Angular-material is good if you already use angular, and does not use webcomponents to implement the design spec. Notably, if you use angular, you should use angular-material as the newer polymer shady / local dom implementation does not look to be out-of-the-box compatible with angular (both libraries do dom manipulation, but polymer requires all dom manipulation to go through its local dom api, see my other thread about this). 

MaterializeCSS is a nice material design implementation (I haven't used it for anything real, but I did run through some demo code with it to see how it works) that is also not webcomponents-based. Furthermore, MaterializeCSS doesn't use flexbox for layouts, and does have a jquery dependency for its javascript controls.

So: they're all different approaches to the material design spec. Materialize is the most agnostic in terms of the rest of your framework, ngMaterial is an angular-only thing, and paper-components are built on polymer/webcomponents. Depends on the rest of your application.

I do like to point out that custom elements at least hold the promise of working with any framework or existing app/page - they're just elements. That's the point of all this work :)

-Justin

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/polymer-dev/CABsi40%2BgBBDcwZtfY8%2B%2B_g7DsaNEkZbp9gkFA8M6RXtWpDTqcA%40mail.gmail.com.

[Eric Eslinger]

That's true, and that's a good point. If you use the full webcomponents polyfill, polymer and angular work together quite nicely, because at that point everything is just plain DOM. I'm looking forward to that day, personally. 

e

[Peng Kim]

Hi,Nano

That' right,Polymer implements material design on top of Webcomponent,they are all based on html5 and css3,the only difference is how they are implemented

Thanks for reminding me

[Peng Kim]

Hi,Eric

I had read your another thread before,and thanks for pointing out the problem your met ,that saves people's time to dig into it.So,that's why i concerned whether angular and polymer work fine together,maybe the root reason cause this problem is shadow-dom for polymer,and light-dom for angular.

So is modular web the only reason for Polymer to choose webcomponent?does it means MaterializeCSS  is more compatible than others of using js

Peng

Thanks

[Peng Kim]

Hi,Eric

Do you mean for now webcomponent polyfill is uncompleted?

[Peng Kim]

Hi Justin

As you point out,custom elements work with frameworks,and If you want more compatibility,you should give up webcomponent,because it kinda fashion