HackerReposA FIELD GUIDE TO OPEN SOURCE
ProSponsor the shelf♧ 0
← Back to top all-time
webcomponents
webcomponentsjs
HTML2015–2018
webcomponents / webcomponentsjs · Archived

webcomponentsjs

A suite of polyfills supporting the HTML Web Components specs

8Distinct people
14Mentions
1Explicit recommenders
3.8KGitHub stars
REPOSITORY AT A GLANCE

What to know before exploring

What it is

A suite of polyfills supporting the HTML Web Components specs

GitHub

Where it is used

No documented product use has been verified yet.

What people are saying

Yes, I'm definitely looking forward to the Real Shadow DOM being browser-supported. I was unable to use the full webcomponents polyfill in my own application, as it introduced…

pfooti used a recommendation phrase. One indexed comment matches. This is a phrase match, not a verdict.

No classified warning is attached to this page. Read the discussions before treating silence as approval.

Also in these discussions

No other repository is repeatedly linked in the same discussions.

This week on Hacker News

Nov 7–Nov 14 UTC · Direct repository links and separately labeled related project stories. Indexed through 11/14/2026, 6:01:08 PM UTC.

No direct repository links were found in the indexed HN discussions over the past seven days. Older discussions are available below.

Mentions over time

HN mentions by year14 dated mentions

Observed mentions: 2015-07-07 01:17:38 UTC to 2018-10-17 12:23:44 UTC.

02462015-01-01 00:00:00 UTC to 2016-01-01 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 4 mentions; 0 submissions, 4 comments20152016-01-01 00:00:00 UTC to 2017-01-01 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 7 mentions; 0 submissions, 7 comments20162017-01-01 00:00:00 UTC to 2018-01-01 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 1 mentions; 0 submissions, 1 comments2018-01-01 00:00:00 UTC to 2019-01-01 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 2 mentions; 0 submissions, 2 comments2018

Counts come from the repository’s dated source evidence. Index cutoff: 2026-11-02 08:16:59 UTC.

View mention counts and date ranges
UTC ranges include their start and exclude their end. Select a period to filter the source evidence.
PeriodStart (UTC)End (exclusive, UTC)MentionsSubmissionsComments
20152015-01-01 00:00:00 UTC2016-01-01 00:00:00 UTC404
20162016-01-01 00:00:00 UTC2017-01-01 00:00:00 UTC707
20172017-01-01 00:00:00 UTC2018-01-01 00:00:00 UTC101
20182018-01-01 00:00:00 UTC2019-01-01 00:00:00 UTC202

What Hacker News says

7 sources
I have recently decided to switch from Polymer to Material2 for the following reasons: - Polymer is only available through bower, which means I have to teach 2 package management systems to my developers. - The documentation is not great (for instance, events are documented in camelCase, but must be listened for in Angular 2 using dashes-between-words). - There are serious issues [0] which not gone resolved for a long time. - The behavior of important components is not intuitive. For instance, the menu component acts more like a list which has a selected item (which also cannot be reselected) [0]: https://github.com/webcomponents/webcomponentsjs/issues/541
In An Introduction to Polymer - A Web Component Library
pfooti·May 8, 2016Recommendation phrase
Yes, I'm definitely looking forward to the Real Shadow DOM being browser-supported. I was unable to use the full webcomponents polyfill in my own application, as it introduced gamebreakers with contenteditable-based rich text editors [0]. Putting polymer anywhere on my page meant my rich text editor (quilljs fwiw) broke on non-chrome browsers, even through I wasn't doing anything polymeresque with the editor. It was just the polyfill interacting poorly with the browser's range implementation. In my case (my application also heavily leaned on angular for routing and page-level templating), I couldn't mix-and-match angular and polymer and also maintain cross-browser support of the text editor. But I still am _super_ excited about the future of the webcomponents world. I mean, if nothing else, having well-namespaced element ids (if I have tw
Read the rest
o editor components on the page, I can't just grab "#dateinput") will be great. I love the idea of directly attaching properties to DOM nodes, encapsulating templates, and projecting content into viewports. It's seriously rad. I am 100% on board with the notion, it's just the polyfill in the meantime that's problematical. https://github.com/webcomponents/webcomponentsjs/issues/212
In Ask HN: What are the cons of Google Polymer?
Start with this: https://github.com/webcomponents/webcomponentsjs/issues/212 Which is why I stopped messing around with polymer. Basically adding the webcomponents polyfill to your DOM tree (because it touches so many things) breaks contenteditable in some weird ways. Which can be limiting to people who use rich text editors (many still decorate contenteditable divs) although iframe-wrapping the editor fixes the contenteditable breakage (at the expense of introducing other problems with extending your editor - try adding custom (say) atmention autocompletes to something in its own execution context). Also, webcomponents have had some pretty major syntax changes over time, especially when it comes to shadow-piercing styling vs other styling selectors. Ultimately, I'm looking forward to webcomponents. I can't wait to have proper namespaces
Read the rest
and all that. In the short run, though, I've tried the webcomponents polyfill (I wrote a lot of polymer 0.X code for a webapp that I eventually ported to angular 1.x instead when the polymer 1.x syntax meant I'd have to rewrite a lot anyway), and it's not Enough.
In Angular 2 Style Guide
Chrome already supports the v0 Shadow DOM spec, and will soon support v1. Edge(nee IE) and Firefox are committed to support and active in the standards discussions, and I believe allocating people to work on it, if not working on it already. Support across all the major browsers will arrive before we know it. We also have polyfills for Shadow DOM and the other Web Components standards, and are updating them for the v1 spec: https://github.com/webcomponents/webcomponentsjs The Shadow DOM polyfill is a bit slow, but soon it'll only be necessary on older browsers, so some properties might be able to adopt full Shadow DOM within the year. If you use Polymer, we have a fast Shadow DOM-like shim called Shadey DOM, and you can pretty seamlessly opt-in to full Shadow DOM where available.
In Introducing Safari Technology Preview

MAKE YOURSELF AT HOME

A few shortcuts

/
Search the collection
?
Open this guide
Esc
Close dialogs and navigation

Your saved repositories and interests stay in this browser.