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

Re: [webcomponents]: Making Shadow DOM Subtrees Traversable

From: Tab Atkins Jr. <jackalmage@gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 26 Feb 2013 10:57:04 -0800
Message-ID: <CAAWBYDDiEo=PCXjNxFimrb0Pqh6sKHay-nESpH4d43mxFAVj2w@mail.gmail.com>
To: Dominic Cooney <dominicc@chromium.org>
Cc: Dimitri Glazkov <dglazkov@chromium.org>, Boris Zbarsky <bzbarsky@mit.edu>, public-webapps <public-webapps@w3.org>, Elliott Sprehn <esprehn@gmail.com>
On Tue, Feb 26, 2013 at 10:44 AM, Dominic Cooney <dominicc@chromium.org> wrote:
> Although the default provided by the spec is important, early adopters are
> also important in shaping practice. There is apparently strong conviction on
> both sides of the argument. If shadows are public by default, there is no
> serious obstacle to making them private on an ad-hoc basis; if shadows are
> private by default, there is no serious obstacle to making them public on an
> ad-hoc basis. Maybe the spec should include non-normative commentary to make
> web component authors aware of this choice, and then the "market"/Darwinian
> process/etc. will decide.

An argument to the contrary (which you do seem to acknowledge later in
your message, if I'm reading correctly): if you make shadow private,
but allow authors to make them public on an ad-hoc basis, there's no
way for tools to reliably access the public shadows.  This was a
problem earlier in the spec, when it was in exactly that state - you
got handed your shadow root explicitly, and could, if you wanted,
assign it to a public property on your own.  That meant, though, that
you could assign it to *any* property, so tools couldn't predict where
to look.

~TJ
Received on Tuesday, 26 February 2013 18:57:55 GMT

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