W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-webapps@w3.org > January to March 2013

Re: [webcomponents]: Making Shadow DOM Subtrees Traversable

From: Bronislav Klučka <Bronislav.Klucka@bauglir.com>
Date: Mon, 25 Feb 2013 19:37:36 +0100
Message-ID: <512BAF70.90203@bauglir.com>
To: public-webapps@w3.org

On 25.2.2013 19:15, Scott Miles wrote:
> I agree with Tab 100% on this.
>
> You cannot accidentally stumble into ShadowDOM. You have to actively 
> take that step.
Sure, someone can actively take step to access my shadow DOM, thou I 
explicitly made it shadow and in next version of the control things will 
break.

>
> For one thing, I suggest that most of the time, the component code is 
> shipping w/your application, you are not depending on some resource 
> that will simply be upgraded out from under you.
Sure, but as a desktop programmer I cannot tell how many times over the 
last decade I have upgraded my applications including 3rd party 
controls... And all I have to do is to check the points whee my app 
touches the controls... Not caring about the rest, because the rest 
cannot be broken (well, can, under extreme circumstances)

>
> For another thing, if I decide it's necessary to monkey-patch some 
> third-party code that's I'm using in my application, I'm generally 
> pretty upset if that code is privatized. It makes that unpleasant work 
> much harder. I need to ship ASAP, and maintenance concerns are secondary.
Assuming of course you can legally do that... privacy of 3rd party 
control has nothing to do with monkey-patchif you have the code... sure 
you cannot do that from outside of the control, but that makes no 
difference (the problem with private clause is inheritance, protected is 
better choice)
>
> I suppose there is a moral hazard argument: if we make it possible, 
> people will overdo it. This is probably true, but IMO it's akin to 
> saying chefs should only use butter knives because they could cut 
> themselves on the sharp kind.
Again, do we have to go with one choice here? Either or? Can we go with 
options when creating Shadow dom?

>
> Lastly, only a subset of possible upgrades actually are transparent, 
> not affecting public API or behavior. Intersect that set of updates 
> with monkey-patchers who can't live without the update, and you are 
> talking about a relatively small affected class.
Well.. yours upgrades maybe...
>
> Scott
>

B.
Received on Monday, 25 February 2013 18:38:00 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 26 March 2013 18:49:57 GMT