Re: [webcomponents] Figure out terminology for Shadow DOM that everyone agrees on (#382)

I've removed `component tree`, `primary component tree` and `fragment tree` form the spec, and use `node trees` almost everywhere as a replacement.

Thus, the followings are remaining contentious bits, right?

- composed tree (of node trees)
- composed {parent/child/ancestor/descendant}

Others ideas so far:
A) `slotted tree`
B) Introduce `connected/disconnected terminology`?
C) shadow-host-including inclusive ancestor

Is there anything else?

Note that the spec has already defined the following terminologies, which we can use:
- *in a composed document*: as an alias for 'a node is an inclusive composed descendant of the root element of document element', which we can use for what 'connected/disconnected' means.
- *shadow-host-including inclusive ancestor* sounds the same meaning of [inclusive composed ancestor](http://localhost:8000/spec/shadow/#dfn-inclusive-composed-ancestor), which the spec already defines.


---
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
https://github.com/w3c/webcomponents/issues/382#issuecomment-192097639