W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-svg@w3.org > March 2005

[sXBL] Various issues in the sXBL draft -- section 4

From: Boris Zbarsky <bzbarsky@mit.edu>
Date: Mon, 28 Mar 2005 21:39:22 -0600
Message-ID: <4248CDEA.1060009@mit.edu>
To: www-svg@w3.org


The part that talks about setting xml:base means that it should be set on the 
children of the clone of the <template> element, right?

If, at a later point in time, script changes the xbl:base attribute of those 
elements to a relative URI, how is that URI resolved?  Are they treated 
effectively as roots, so that it's resolved relative to the base URI of their 

What happens if the prebind event detaches the binding?  I assume that the 
setting of the xblShadowTree attribute should be skipped in this case; that's 
worth spelling out, probably.

If I understand correctly, the parentNode of the kids of the shadowTree node 
remains the shadowTree node, and the parentNode of the shadowTree node is null, 


When doing the depth-first walk looking for matching content elements, is it 
pre-order, in-order, or post-order?  I'm assuming the desired behavior is 
pre-order (that is, use the first <content> element using the standard DOM 
ordering on nodes).


Are mutation events required, allowed, or prohibited from firing during the 
shadow tree reconstruction that follows modification of a <template> subtree? 
Further, are shadow trees that were explicitly modified via the DOM also 
destroyed and completely reconstructed when the <template> subtree is modified?


I think my personal preference is that CSS selectors apply based on the Core DOM 
parent/child/sibling links...  the processing model described means that 
XBl-defined widgets that actually interleave content would pretty seriously 
affect the styling of the non-shadow DOM nodes.


I'm not quite sure what "Sheets are always walked from the innermost shadow 
scope to the outermost shadow scope" means, if the stylesheets of the binding 
document don't affect the bound element or its non-shadow descendants.  Is this 
a matter of shadow content nodes being styled by sheets in the bound document? 
If so, that should be clarified.

Received on Tuesday, 29 March 2005 03:39:23 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Wednesday, 8 March 2017 09:47:02 UTC