W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-webapps@w3.org > October to December 2010

Re: XBL2: First Thoughts and Use Cases

From: Robert O'Callahan <robert@ocallahan.org>
Date: Sun, 12 Dec 2010 21:52:15 +1300
Message-ID: <AANLkTimR7LwDugM+=0DE-B_3LOgj9ND-g7gR8OG5F6v3@mail.gmail.com>
To: Dimitri Glazkov <dglazkov@google.com>
Cc: public-webapps <public-webapps@w3.org>
On Sat, Dec 11, 2010 at 1:04 PM, Dimitri Glazkov <dglazkov@google.com>wrote:

> Looking at the use cases, I couldn't think of anything that would
> require this type of functionality -- at least not at the cost of its
> complexity and performance implications.
> Perhaps something simpler, forward-only would be a better solution?
> Maybe a template is just a stencil that provides a declarative way to
> describe how the shadow DOM is wired up. Once the instance is
> stenciled, it has no knowledge of where or how it was created.

We definitely have use-cases that require the shadow DOM to be dynamically
updated when an element that expands to a template instance has its subtree
changed. Almost every application that combines dynamic DOM modification
(e.g. editing) with templates needs this. So you do need to record how
instances were created.

I agree that handling dynamic updates to the bindings document is less
well-motivated. It might be useful for a template editor. But a template
editor could probably just unapply the entire bindings document, modify it,
and reapply it.

"Now the Bereans were of more noble character than the Thessalonians, for
they received the message with great eagerness and examined the Scriptures
every day to see if what Paul said was true." [Acts 17:11]
Received on Sunday, 12 December 2010 08:52:42 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Friday, 27 October 2017 07:26:28 UTC