[Bug 26365] [Shadow]: Need an equivalent definition of 'in a Document' for shadow trees

https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=26365

--- Comment #31 from Hayato Ito <hayato@chromium.org> ---
A small correction. #c is actually distributed, but it is not in a composed
tree (with document as root) because the destination insertion point of #c is
in the oldest shadow tree, which is *disconnected*.

(In reply to Hayato Ito from comment #30)
> No, the actual is:
> 
> - #c (or #d) is *not* in the composed tree (with document as root).
> 
>   These nodes are child nodes of the shadow host (#a), however, they are not
> distributed at all.
> 
> - However, #c (or #d) is "in a document".
> 
> 
> A "composed document" (D) might be a good name for D, but I'm afraid that it
> is confusing name for D because #c (or #d) must belong to D, but #c (or #d)
> is not in the composed tree (with document as root).
> 
> I think "composed document" might be a good name for "C", "composed tree
> (with document as root), rather.

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

Received on Monday, 10 November 2014 01:49:26 UTC