HTML Attributes vs Component Arguments

[MichalBryxi]

I’m somehow confused about the Component Arguments vs HTML Attributes thing in built-in components documentation

The <Input> component in the examples uses Component Arguments for @id, @type, @value and HTML Attributes for disabled. But then in the table of supported <input> attributes one can see value and disabled next to each other. So it’s not obvious whether one should use @ symbol or not.

My blind guess would be that the syntax should be:

<Input width={{27}} />
<Input placeholder="foo bar" />
<Input maxlength={{42}} />

But again seeing the @type and @value examples hints me that a @ symbol might be expected for width, placeholder and maxlength?

Should the table of arguments maybe have the respective @ symbols where Component Argument is expected?

[locks]

The built-in components are a bit special because they were designed and implemented much prior to angle bracket syntax and the possibility to pass HTML attributes ad-hoc.
There's also something special regarding @type because if I'm remembering correctly, you cannot change the type of an input after adding it to the DOM. There's also some shenanigans going on with the ordering of the attributes. HTML 👀.

We are revisiting this as a whole and likely move it towards favouring HTML attributes, making it more clear which things have to be passed as arguments (e.g. @type) and which can be passed as HTML attributes.

[locks]

Can you send a PR with the change you mentioned? And tweaking the "You can pass the following standard attributes within the input helper:" prose to make sure it mentions component arguments?

[jamescdavis]

Is this closed by #1296? @jenweber

[locks]

Further work is tracked at #1254.