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

Re: [webcomponents]: Making Shadow DOM Subtrees Traversable

From: Alan Stearns <stearns@adobe.com>
Date: Tue, 12 Mar 2013 15:34:06 -0700
To: Boris Zbarsky <bzbarsky@MIT.EDU>, Dimitri Glazkov <dglazkov@chromium.org>
CC: Blake Kaplan <mrbkap@gmail.com>, Elliott Sprehn <esprehn@gmail.com>, William Chen <wchen@mozilla.com>, Daniel Buchner <daniel@mozilla.com>, Jonas Sicking <jonas@sicking.cc>, public-webapps <public-webapps@w3.org>
Message-ID: <CD64FA69.1F78E%stearns@adobe.com>
On 3/12/13 2:41 PM, "Boris Zbarsky" <bzbarsky@MIT.EDU> wrote:

>On 3/12/13 5:19 PM, Dimitri Glazkov wrote:
>> However, to allow developers a degree of enforcing integrity of their
>> shadow trees, we are going add a new mode, an equivalent of a "KEEP OUT"
>> sign, if you will, which will makes a shadow tree non-traversable,
>> effectively skipping over it in an element's shadow tree stack.
>
>To be clear, what this mode does is turn off the simple way of getting
>the shadow tree.  It does not promise that someone can't get at the
>shadow tree via various non-obvious methods, because in practice such
>promises are empty as long as script inside the component runs against
>the web page global.
>
>The question is how to name this.  "Hidden" seems to promise too much to
>me.  Perhaps "obfuscated"?  "Veiled"?
>
>-Boris
>
>P.S.  Tempting as it is, "RedWithGreenPolkadots" is probably not an OK
>name for this bikeshed.

Apologies in advance for adding to the bikeshedding

protected (mostly private, but you can get around it)
shielded (the shield can be lowered)
gated (the gate can be opened)
fenced (most fences have an opening)

Or bleenish-grue, if we're going with color names.

Alan
Received on Tuesday, 12 March 2013 22:34:56 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 26 March 2013 18:49:58 GMT