connectedCallback timing when the document parser creates custom elements #551

kojiishi · 2016-08-23T05:16:51Z

From a blink bug, an author reported that connectedCallback is called too early in Blink.

<script>customElements.define('x-x', ...);
<script>customElements.define('y-y', ...);
<x-x>
  <div></div>
  <y-y></y-y>
</x-x>

or a sample code in jsfiddle.

When current Blink impl runs this code, this.children.length is 1 in connectedCallback for x-x. This looks like matching to the spec to me, but I appreciate discussion here to confirm if my understanding is correct, and also to confirm if this is what we should expect.

My reading goes this way:

The parser is in the "in body" insertion mode.
It sees x-x as Any other start tag, it insert an HTML element.
insert a foreign element says to create an element for a token, then insert.
Note that this "insert" is not a link, but I assume this is insert a node?
In insert a node, step 5.2.1 enqueues connectedCallback.
In enqueue a custom element callback reaction, it adds to the backup element queue.
The parser then reads div. In its create an element for a token, definition is null, so will execute script is false. This div is then inserted.
The parser then reads y-y. In its create an element for a token, definition is non-null, so will execute script is true.
Step 6.2 perform a microtask checkpoint if will execute script is true, so the connectedCallback runs here.

Am I reading the spec correctly? If so, is this what we should expect?

@domenic @dominiccooney @rniwa

The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:

domenic · 2016-08-23T05:26:29Z

In enqueue a custom element callback reaction, it adds to the backup element queue.

I think you are correct that the spec says this, but this also seems wrong. The backup element queue should be avoidable when we are doing parsing; it should only be used for things like editing. We should be able to just use the element queue created for that element.

That would make connectedCallback be called with zero children, right? That sounds much better.

I am not sure what the best spec fix is for this---it is getting late over here---but maybe it would suffice to just push an element queue in "insert a foreign element", then pop it and run reactions? Better suggestions appreciated.

kojiishi · 2016-08-23T06:18:58Z

Yeah, 0 sounds much better than 1, and "insert a foreign element" looks the right place.

I also understand web developers might expect 2 instead of 0, but that's harder, wondering whether the benefit is worth the complexity or not.

annevk · 2016-08-23T07:37:05Z

No. We absolutely want zero children in as many places as possible. The whole point is that you should not depend on children, since you cannot depend on them with createElement() either. Web developers should create robust custom element implementations, not half-baked ones.

kojiishi · 2016-08-23T09:26:26Z

In constructor, yes, but in connectedCallback, authors can add children before adding the element to a document, no?

annevk · 2016-08-23T09:28:12Z

Ah yeah they could. But that should not be required by the custom element.

ju-lien · 2016-08-23T14:07:53Z

I'am the author of the blink bug,

Ah yeah they could. But that should not be required by the custom element.

Could you explain why ? connectedCallback() is called when the node is inserted in a DOM, so i think it should be aware of its own children ?

If not, how/when a CE can work with its children ?

Also it's very bizare that connectedCallback() doesn't have the same capability when the node is created from the parser or upgraded.

annevk · 2016-08-23T14:59:16Z

When the node is created and inserted, it doesn't have any children.

matthewp · 2016-08-23T16:10:47Z

So... how do you work with custom elements that have expectations about their children?

annevk · 2016-08-23T16:12:09Z

Mutation observers.

matthewp · 2016-08-23T16:46:30Z

So connectedCallback is called with 0 children in the case of upgrades, but if I am to do:

var myEl = document.createElement('my-element');
myEl.appendChild(document.createElement('span'));

var frag = document.createDocumentFragment();
frag.appendChild(myEl);

document.body.appendChild(frag);

Then "my-element"'s connectedCallback is called when the fragment is inserted into the body and it will have 1 children in this case.

So a custom element with expectations on children will need to:

Check if has children in connectedCallback, do stuff
Set up a mutation observer and do stuff when nodes are added (which will happen in the case of upgrades).
Disconnect the mutation observer in disconnectedCallback

No concerns here, just trying to work it out in my head.

annevk · 2016-08-23T16:59:36Z

If you set up the mutation observer at construction time, that first appendChild() can trigger do stuff too, but if you only want to observe while connected something like that could work.

annevk · 2016-08-23T17:00:40Z

I meant it can cause do stuff to be scheduled. Mutation observers run end-of-task so not immediately.

rniwa · 2016-08-23T17:22:53Z

An alternative is to add childrenChangedCallback: #550

ju-lien · 2016-08-23T18:06:57Z

Mutation observers.

For now in chrome canary ( i don't know if it matches the spec or not), if i try to get all children with an observer even in constructor(), the observer is fired 2 times as you can see in this jsfiddle.
So if i just want to have a list of initial children, i don't know when i have to disconnect the observer and do the work?

An alternative is to add childrenChangedCallback: #550

Why not if all initial children are returned in one call.

annevk · 2016-08-23T18:34:37Z

The whole idea of initial children is flawed. Children are dynamic.

domenic · 2016-08-23T19:00:28Z

Indeed. In general the multi-tag designs of HTML (e.g. <select> + <option>, <ul> + <li>, <picture> + <source> + <img>, etc.) are very fragile; the amount of spec machinery involved in making them work correctly is extensive and in some cases still buggy in the current spec. (We don't even have a correct design for <li> yet, this many years later: whatwg/html#1617.) Web devs should be very cautious when trying to set up such designs for their custom elements; you need to be aware of how children change dynamically, and not just use the children as some kind of setup data.

domenic · 2016-08-23T19:12:40Z

It's worth noting that in the past we've talked about adding a new callback for this sort of thing, I think someone called it closeTagReachedCallback or something. That would be useful for emulating <script> behavior, I think.

Fixes WICG/webcomponents#551 by ensuring that insertions into the DOM trigger connectedCallback immediately, instead of putting the callback reaction on the the backup element queue and letting it get triggered at the next microtask checkpoint. This means connectedCallback will generally be invoked when the element has zero children, as expected, instead of a random number depending on when the next custom element is seen.

rniwa · 2016-08-23T21:17:49Z

FWIW, I would object to adding something like closeTagReachedCallback because they're specific to HTML parser behavior. I'd much rather add something like childrenChangedCallback, which can be used either during DOM mutations or during parsers.

ju-lien · 2016-08-23T21:58:28Z

Thanks domenic for this complete answer.

I thought indeed to this type of case, an element that sort its children or compute a layout.

For example to create an element that compute a sexy layout, its important to access to an initial state of children to avoid re-compute the layout many times(each time a new CE children is parsed) for just the first render...

So i understand we should avoid to use the children as some kind of setup data, but what is the main technical reason to not to do that ?

domenic · 2016-08-23T22:01:26Z

For example to create an element that compute a sexy layout, its important to access to an initial state of children to avoid re-compute the layout many times(each time a new CE children is parsed) for just the first render...

What I'd suggest doing is just resorting or re-rendering your children on every requestAnimationFrame. That way you will not only get the post-parsing batching behavior you desire, but you will also synchronize your work with when it's displayed to users.

So i understand we should avoid to use the children as some kind of setup data, but what is the main technical reason to not to do that ?

I thought I explained why that was above, talking about how they are dynamic and can change any time, and this leads to complicated behavior.

ju-lien · 2016-08-23T22:17:58Z

What I'd suggest doing is just resorting or re-rendering your children on every requestAnimationFrame. That way you will not only get the post-parsing batching behavior you desire, but you will also synchronize your work with when it's displayed to users.

Ok, that's a good idea.
Even it's seems a - little - hacky for a brand new API.

I thought I explained why that was above, talking about how they are dynamic and can change any time, and this leads to complicated behavior.

Ok, thanks, it's bizarre but i trust you :)

domenic · 2016-08-23T22:24:39Z

Ok, that's a good idea. Even it's seems a - little - hacky for a brand new API.

Nah. When do you think browsers update rendering for their elements? (The answer is: every animation frame callback.)

annevk · 2016-08-24T04:50:09Z

Only if there is something to update though.

Fixes WICG/webcomponents#551 by ensuring that insertions into the DOM trigger connectedCallback immediately, instead of putting the callback reaction on the the backup element queue and letting it get triggered at the next microtask checkpoint. This means connectedCallback will generally be invoked when the element has zero children, as expected, instead of a random number depending on when the next custom element is seen.

ju-lien · 2016-08-24T22:51:07Z

Sorry to come back but i was checking the SkateJS library and i saw that in the todolist example on the homepage:

...
attached(elem) {
    // Setup the initial list of items from the current children.
    elem.items = elem.children;
  },
...

And attached() seems to rely on connectedCallback().

So i think it show the need to really clarify the situation - or - provide a real solution even requestAnimationFrame() could do the trick.

domenic · 2016-08-24T22:56:25Z

Yeah, this might be worth someone doing a blog post on or similar.

matthewp · 2016-08-24T22:58:25Z

A library could provide that hook for you, or conversely a small function could give you the same behavior:

connectedCallback() {
  onChildren(this, children => {

  });
}

WebReflection · 2018-10-19T10:02:15Z

Right ... little variation that uses a WeakMap instead and it's also observing children for all occasions

const HTMLParsedElement = (() => {
  const DCL = 'DOMContentLoaded';
  const init = new WeakMap;
  const isParsed = el => {
    do {
      if (el.nextSibling)
        return true;
    } while (el = el.parentNode);
    return false;
  };
  const cleanUp = (el, observer, ownerDocument, onDCL) => {
    observer.disconnect();
    ownerDocument.removeEventListener(DCL, onDCL);
    init.set(el, true);
    parsedCallback(el);
  };
  const parsedCallback = el => el.parsedCallback();
  return class HTMLParsedElement extends HTMLElement {
    connectedCallback() {
      if ('parsedCallback' in this && !init.has(this)) {
        const self = this;
        const {ownerDocument} = self;
        init.set(self, false);
        if (ownerDocument.readyState === 'complete' || isParsed(self))
          Promise.resolve(self).then(parsedCallback);
        else {
          const onDCL = () => cleanUp(self, observer, ownerDocument, onDCL);
          ownerDocument.addEventListener(DCL, onDCL);
          const observer = new MutationObserver(changes => {
            if (isParsed(self)) {
              cleanUp(self, observer, ownerDocument, onDCL);
              return true;
            }
          });
          observer.observe(self.parentNode, {childList: true, subtree: true});
        }
      }
    }
    get parsed() {
      return init.get(this) === true;
    }
  };
})();

I think I'll publish this one to npm.

franktopel · 2018-10-19T11:02:12Z

@WebReflection

Comments on your comments:

in empty custom elements a childrenAvailableCallback, as the name implies, doesn't make much sense anyway. As far as I can see you can simply extend HTMLElement instead of HTMLBaseElement in that case. At the end of the day, this approach is meant to solve the problem that arises from children being unavailable when connectedCallback triggers.
Then how would you address asynchronous adding of child elements? Probably the right approach here would be to pass a cleanUp callback to childrenAvailableCallback.

What is still open with this solution is to adjust it for use in customized-built-ins that have expectations about their children.

Btw, I was also considering publishing this on npm, but probably it'll gain more traction if you do it.

franktopel · 2018-10-19T11:50:36Z

@WebReflection I saw you're quick: https://github.com/WebReflection/html-parsed-element

I wouldn't reject attribution, neither would @irhadkul I assume :)

WebReflection · 2018-10-19T13:01:11Z

well, if any of you want I can include attributions but just to be clear, this is what HyperHTMLElement does since about ever, using a timeout instead of MutationObserver for better compatibility (down to IE9) and without guarding all calls to connected/attributeChanged before the created() is invoked.

The html-parsed-element is an alternative that might become handy for those not interested in HyperHTMLElement.

I will still link to this ticket in there so again, I don't mind adding anyone in here as contributor 👋

WebReflection · 2018-10-19T13:10:39Z

also @franktopel ...

this approach is meant to solve the problem that arises from children being unavailable when connectedCallback triggers.

My approach solves every issue. When parsedCallback is invoked you will have children in there, if any. If you want to listen to further mutations to children, just add your own Mutation Observer.

Then how would you address asynchronous adding of child elements?

You don't . You disconnect the observer too so that's not your intent and also you want to this.childrenAvailableCallback() once, and once only indeed.

Again, the missing bit that is essential is to know when it's safe to handle children or even inject nodes/html. Once we have that, everything else is trivial.

franktopel · 2018-10-19T13:19:55Z

Attribution is definitely welcome. While none of us has done anything even remotely comparable to your work, we surely contributed to the birth of html-parsed-element with the last 10 days' work.
Regarding your comment for better compatibility (down to IE9) I was surprised to find HyperHTMLElement is compatible with every mobile browser and IE11 or greater on https://github.com/WebReflection/hyperHTML-Element

WebReflection · 2018-10-19T14:16:30Z

IIR you can test this page and it should work in IE9 too
https://webreflection.github.io/hyperHTML-Element/test/?es5

compatibility is probably for something not fully transpilable but I don't remember what.

Feel free to file a PR for the attribution so I'm sure it's done properly/as you expect.

franktopel · 2018-10-19T15:00:20Z

Btw, how does attributeChangedCallback() behave with respect to children? We have a tabs component that is controlled via a data-active-tab attribute in combination with an attributeChangedCallback case.

WebReflection · 2018-10-19T21:43:22Z

@franktopel the attributeChangedCallback is triggered as soon as the beginning of the node is known, AKA the opening tag.

Differently from connectedCallback or whatever children watcher we want, the attributeChangedCallback will never trigger when one attribute is known but another one isn't ,because attributeChangedCallback is consistent in triggering when all attributes on the opening tag are known, instead of randomly in the wild without any signal all nodes are known, which is what my proposal addresses.

WebReflection · 2018-10-19T21:46:32Z

P.S. @franktopel attributions are live

franktopel · 2018-10-20T06:45:49Z

@WebReflection So in that case we (our team) have the exact same problem with attributeChangedCallback as well.

the attributeChangedCallback is triggered as soon as the beginning of the node is known, AKA the opening tag. How is that ever useful at all? What would a developer ever want to do at that point in time, without being able to access the element's content?

WebReflection · 2018-10-20T09:11:14Z

@franktopel it's useful for empty nodes with shadow dom, and not much else indeed.

With parsedCallback you can setup sure that attributes are there as well.

Meanwhile, if you react to attributeChangedCallback, if this.parsed is false you should queue the operations if important for the component state.

const attributeChanged = new WeakMap;
class MyEl extends HTMLParsedElement {
  parsedCallback() {
    // setup the node, you have access to all its content/attributes
    // then ...
    const changes = attributeChanged.get(this);
    if (changes) {
      attributeChanged.delete(this);
      changes.forEach(args => this.attributeChangedCallback(...args));
    }
  }

  attributeChangedCallback(...args) {
    if (!this.parsed) {
      const changes = attributeChanged.get(this) || [];
      if (changes.push(args) === 1)
        attributeChanged.set(this, changes);
      return;
    }
    // the rest of the code
  }

  connectedCallback() {
    // here you can safely add listeners
    // or set own component properties
    this.live = true;
  }

  disconnectedCallback() {
    // here you can safely remove listeners
    this.live = false;
  }
}

franktopel · 2018-10-20T09:36:16Z

Well, we're not using shadow DOM at all. We just need to replicate Swing controls for the web, for a huge migration project. And currently it needs to support IE 11 mainly. And it has to work for the next 10 to 15 years, without huge update efforts, like you'd have with using a framework like Angular or React. That's why the company decided to use native web components.

So you're saying the whole spec has been designed around a very limited use edge case?

franktopel · 2018-10-20T15:21:07Z

Also, we have been using attributeChangedCallback on a tabs component to set the initially active/visible tab, so this must again have been an issue of it working in the upgrade case, but not in the parsing case. What a mess, again!

franktopel · 2018-10-21T06:05:27Z

Wouldn't it be an even better approach to dispatch a ComponentContentLoaded custom event? That would solve the attributeChangedCallback problem as well, and it would make it so outside elements and components can attach a listener to that event (if they rely on it).

We could even have all components register at a central service in their constructor on creation, and have that same service emit a global ComponentsReady event as soon as all registered component instances have emitted their ComponentContentLoaded event.

WebReflection · 2018-10-21T09:24:23Z

You can dispatch any event you want from parsedCallback ...having hybrid callbacks and events feels inconsistent with the API , imo

Fixes WICG/webcomponents#551 by ensuring that insertions into the DOM trigger connectedCallback immediately, instead of putting the callback reaction on the the backup element queue and letting it get triggered at the next microtask checkpoint. This means connectedCallback will generally be invoked when the element has zero children, as expected, instead of a random number depending on when the next custom element is seen.

Offroaders123 · 2022-04-09T01:11:02Z

#551 (comment)

@franktopel and @WebReflection, thank you again for making a full implementation of this, I think it will help out a ton! I love how Web Components work, and using this in addition with Constructable Stylesheets will make everything so much more seamless, now being able to parse innerHTML consistently.

mangelozzi · 2022-11-19T08:18:23Z

Noob suggestion here, why not just link your scripts with deferred or type="module", that way you know the DOM will be parsed and the child nodes present when your connectedCallback runs?

<script type="module" src="/static/..../component.min.js>

dux · 2023-02-09T18:26:13Z

Noob suggestion here, why not just link your scripts with deferred or type="module", that way you know the DOM will be parsed and the child nodes present when your connectedCallback runs?

That will not work for nodes that are dynamically inserted, after initial setup.

dux · 2023-02-09T18:31:02Z

Solution for this problem is pretty simple, all one has to do it wrap connectedCallback in window.requestAnimationFrame and you will always have all children available.

I am pretty sure this is faster then any other proposed solution, as setTimeout # 0 and similar.

More in my answer here
https://stackoverflow.com/questions/70949141/web-components-accessing-innerhtml-in-connectedcallback/75402874#75402874

Sleepful · 2023-03-08T06:22:53Z

@dux not correct apparently, read thread from here: #809 (comment)

domenic mentioned this issue Aug 23, 2016

Process custom element connectedCallback immediately during parsing whatwg/html#1707

Merged

annevk closed this as completed in whatwg/html#1707 Aug 24, 2016

aaronshaf mentioned this issue Oct 19, 2018

Summarizing the need WebReflection/html-parsed-element#2

Closed

AndyOGo mentioned this issue Jan 23, 2019

express complexity, non-deterministicity and asynchronicity AndyOGo/custom-element-reactions-diagram#13

Closed

AndyOGo mentioned this issue Mar 3, 2019

appreciate your feedback for custom element diagram #784

Open

annevk mentioned this issue May 2, 2019

Need a callback for when children changed or parser finished parsing children #809

Open

maier49 mentioned this issue Jun 10, 2019

Fix custom element initialization dojo/framework#394

Merged

3 tasks

alenaksu mentioned this issue Apr 9, 2021

How to use in with just index.js? alenaksu/json-viewer#13

Closed

patricknelson mentioned this issue Dec 9, 2023

Getting rid of the svelte-retag wrapper patricknelson/svelte-retag#20

Open

matthiashader mentioned this issue Jul 23, 2024

fix(core/menu-item): occasionally empty tooltips in menu-item siemens/ix#1370

Merged

8 tasks

connectedCallback timing when the document parser creates custom elements #551

connectedCallback timing when the document parser creates custom elements #551

Comments

kojiishi commented Aug 23, 2016

domenic commented Aug 23, 2016

kojiishi commented Aug 23, 2016

annevk commented Aug 23, 2016

kojiishi commented Aug 23, 2016

annevk commented Aug 23, 2016

ju-lien commented Aug 23, 2016

annevk commented Aug 23, 2016

matthewp commented Aug 23, 2016

annevk commented Aug 23, 2016

matthewp commented Aug 23, 2016 • edited Loading

annevk commented Aug 23, 2016

annevk commented Aug 23, 2016

rniwa commented Aug 23, 2016

ju-lien commented Aug 23, 2016

annevk commented Aug 23, 2016

domenic commented Aug 23, 2016

domenic commented Aug 23, 2016

rniwa commented Aug 23, 2016

ju-lien commented Aug 23, 2016

domenic commented Aug 23, 2016

ju-lien commented Aug 23, 2016

domenic commented Aug 23, 2016

annevk commented Aug 24, 2016

ju-lien commented Aug 24, 2016

domenic commented Aug 24, 2016

matthewp commented Aug 24, 2016

WebReflection commented Oct 19, 2018 • edited Loading

franktopel commented Oct 19, 2018 • edited Loading

franktopel commented Oct 19, 2018 • edited Loading

WebReflection commented Oct 19, 2018

WebReflection commented Oct 19, 2018 • edited Loading

franktopel commented Oct 19, 2018 • edited Loading

WebReflection commented Oct 19, 2018 • edited Loading

franktopel commented Oct 19, 2018 • edited Loading

WebReflection commented Oct 19, 2018

WebReflection commented Oct 19, 2018

franktopel commented Oct 20, 2018 • edited Loading

WebReflection commented Oct 20, 2018 • edited Loading

franktopel commented Oct 20, 2018 • edited Loading

franktopel commented Oct 20, 2018 • edited Loading

franktopel commented Oct 21, 2018 • edited Loading

WebReflection commented Oct 21, 2018

Offroaders123 commented Apr 9, 2022 • edited Loading

mangelozzi commented Nov 19, 2022

dux commented Feb 9, 2023

dux commented Feb 9, 2023

Sleepful commented Mar 8, 2023

matthewp commented Aug 23, 2016 •

edited

Loading

WebReflection commented Oct 19, 2018 •

edited

Loading

franktopel commented Oct 19, 2018 •

edited

Loading

franktopel commented Oct 19, 2018 •

edited

Loading

WebReflection commented Oct 19, 2018 •

edited

Loading

franktopel commented Oct 19, 2018 •

edited

Loading

WebReflection commented Oct 19, 2018 •

edited

Loading

franktopel commented Oct 19, 2018 •

edited

Loading

franktopel commented Oct 20, 2018 •

edited

Loading

WebReflection commented Oct 20, 2018 •

edited

Loading

franktopel commented Oct 20, 2018 •

edited

Loading

franktopel commented Oct 20, 2018 •

edited

Loading

franktopel commented Oct 21, 2018 •

edited

Loading

Offroaders123 commented Apr 9, 2022 •

edited

Loading