In a previous draft of this proposal, we proposed a shorthand for the new syntax:

``` html

<foo ()="{ msg }">

{{ msg }}

</foo>

<foo>

<template (header)="{ msg }">

Message from header: {{ msg }}

</template>

<template (footer)>

A static footer

</template>

</foo>

Here the `v-slot:arg` is translated into `(arg)`.

However, there were very mixed opinions on which symbol should be used for the shorthand, or whether a shorthand is needed at all. Two most favored alternative symbols for the shorthand are listed below:

``` html

<foo #="{ msg }">

{{ msg }}

</foo>

<foo>

<template #header="{ msg }">

Message from header: {{ msg }}

</template>

<template #footer>

A static footer

</template>

</foo>

``` html

<foo &="{ msg }">

{{ msg }}

</foo>

<foo>

<template &header="{ msg }">

Message from header: {{ msg }}

</template>

<template &footer>

A static footer

</template>

</foo>

Personally, I think a shorthand is a beneficial addition, as it makes the slot designation jump out from normal props and directives and makes the template easier to scan.

Some may argue that scoped slots are not that commonly used and therefore don't really need a shorthand. On that front, I actually believe scoped slot is an important mechanism for building 3rd party component suites that are highly customizable. For a user using a component collection with an API that relies heavily on slots, a shorthand will become quite valuable.

After the initial round of feedback I agree that `()` as the shorthand can be potentially confusing to beginners, and am now leaning towards `#`. Some examples of the usage in a real-world library that relies on scoped slots ([vue-promised](https://github.com/posva/vue-promised)):

``` html

<Promised :promise="usersPromise">

<template #pending>

<p>Loading...</p>

</template>

<template #="users">

<ul>

<li v-for="user in users">{{ user.name }}</li>

</ul>

</template>

<template #rejected="error">

<p>Error: {{ error.message }}</p>

</template>

</Promised>