W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-style@w3.org > April 2011

Re: Need a better way to reach into the shadow DOM subtree

From: Dimitri Glazkov <dglazkov@google.com>
Date: Mon, 11 Apr 2011 15:12:14 -0700
Message-ID: <BANLkTi=yJtcE7DCLkQfndnz5Mbk0A917Wg@mail.gmail.com>
To: Boris Zbarsky <bzbarsky@mit.edu>
Cc: "Tab Atkins Jr." <jackalmage@gmail.com>, "www-style@w3.org" <www-style@w3.org>
On Mon, Apr 11, 2011 at 3:08 PM, Boris Zbarsky <bzbarsky@mit.edu> wrote:
> On 4/11/11 2:58 PM, Tab Atkins Jr. wrote:
>>
>> XBL exposes the shadow tree directly
>
> I have no idea what you mean by that.
>
>> 1. It makes the selector tree not match the source tree, without an
>> explicit indication that something weird is going on.  Components
>> should, in general, look like and act like normal elements, so that
>> ordinary selectors act in expected ways.  (For example, "details>  p"
>> should match the<p>  in "<details><p>foo</p></details>", even if the
>> implementation puts a shadow wrapper around the contents.
>
> That works today, in XBL1 and in the XBL2 proposals.  Have you actually
> tried this, or did you just assume things about the way those work that
> don't match reality?
>
>> 2. It exposes the entire shadow tree.
>
> _This_ I agree is a problem in current XBL1/2.  However, it seems like so
> does the '%' proposal.  And if it doesn't, then whatever restrictions that
> proposal is applying can apply just as easily to ' '.
>
> So I still don't see the need for a new combinator here...
>
>> (Hyatt already lodged a strong complaint against anything
>> that selects into the raw shadow tree, rather than selecting from
>> among a curated set of elements in the shadow.)
>
> I have no problem with making ' ' do that.

Space won't work, because you'll have ambiguity with what you're
trying to address: are these children of the element or the shadow
subtree elements?

:DG<
Received on Monday, 11 April 2011 22:12:38 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 26 March 2013 17:20:39 GMT