[Bug 22203] [Shadow]: It would be nice to have a general term which can specify either a document tree or a shadow tree.

https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=22203

--- Comment #1 from Dimitri Glazkov <dglazkov@chromium.org> ---
(In reply to comment #0)
> A document tree and a shadow tree are used mutually exclusive in the spec.
> 
> Can we define a term that can specify either a document tree or a shadow
> tree?

A tree? http://dom.spec.whatwg.org/#concept-tree :)

> 
> In addition to that, can we define the relationship of trees using the terms
> of (child, parent, descendant or ascendent) rather than (nesting, enclosing)?

What's wrong with nesting and enclosing? I am trying to understand the problem
you're trying to solve.

> Hopefully, that makes the spec simpler. For example, we can define an
> *inclusive-ancestor tree* and use that in the spec.

Where do we need it?

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are the QA Contact for the bug.

Received on Thursday, 30 May 2013 16:34:57 UTC