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

Re: [webcomponents]: Making Shadow DOM Subtrees Traversable

From: Erik Arvidsson <arv@google.com>
Date: Tue, 26 Feb 2013 14:05:14 -0500
Message-ID: <CAJ8+GojVn9eWz9QiEOkWJo7qMBhdhOf-7=2Ngyd11+vGUwrg2w@mail.gmail.com>
To: "Tab Atkins, Jr." <jackalmage@gmail.com>
Cc: Boris Zbarsky <bzbarsky@mit.edu>, public-webapps <public-webapps@w3.org>, Dominic Cooney <dominicc@chromium.org>, Elliott Sprehn <esprehn@gmail.com>, Dimitri Glazkov <dglazkov@chromium.org>
Also, if shadows are public by default the API to access the shadow is well
defined. If shadows are private by default and components decide to expose
the shadow ad hoc then there is no standardized API.
On Feb 26, 2013 1:59 PM, "Tab Atkins Jr." <jackalmage@gmail.com> wrote:

> 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 19:05:46 GMT

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