Re: Imperative API for Node Distribution in Shadow DOM (Revisited)

Thanks. I am really glad to see more and more guys are thinking about
Shadow DOM.
I know distribution/re-distributions is a tough issue. A lot of exciting
things are waiting for you. :)

On Sat, Apr 25, 2015 at 10:19 AM Ryosuke Niwa <rniwa@apple.com> wrote:

> Sure, I'll put the summary of discussion there later.
>
> - R. Niwa
>
> On Apr 25, 2015, at 10:00 AM, Hayato Ito <hayato@chromium.org> wrote:
>
> Thank you, guys.
> I really appreciate if you guys could use the W3C bug, 18429, to discuss
> this kind of specific topic about Shadow DOM so that we can track the
> progress easily in one place. I'm not fan of the discussion being
> scattered. :)
>
> https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=18429
>
>
> On Sat, Apr 25, 2015 at 9:32 AM Anne van Kesteren <annevk@annevk.nl>
> wrote:
>
>> On Sat, Apr 25, 2015 at 12:17 AM, Ryosuke Niwa <rniwa@apple.com> wrote:
>> > In today's F2F, I've got an action item to come up with a concrete
>> workable
>> > proposal for imperative API.  I had a great chat about this afterwards
>> with
>> > various people who attended F2F and here's a summary.  I'll continue to
>> work
>> > with Dimitri & Erik to work out details in the coming months (our
>> deadline
>> > is July 13th).
>> >
>> > https://gist.github.com/rniwa/2f14588926e1a11c65d3
>>
>> I thought we came up with something somewhat simpler that didn't
>> require adding an event or adding remove() for that matter:
>>
>>   https://gist.github.com/annevk/e9e61801fcfb251389ef
>>
>> I added an example there that shows how you could implement <content
>> select>, it's rather trivial with the matches() API. I think you can
>> derive any other use case easily from that example, though I'm willing
>> to help guide people through others if it is unclear. I guess we might
>> still want positional insertion as a convenience though the above
>> seems to be all you need primitive-wise.
>>
>>
>> --
>> https://annevankesteren.nl/
>>
>>