ping Simon, Andreas
On Thu, Aug 22, 2013 at 11:55 AM, Ken Kania <kkania@google.com> wrote:
> I'd be happy to if others feel this might be a good approach. Simon,
> Andreas, any reservations or thoughts?
>
>
> On Thu, Aug 22, 2013 at 2:03 AM, David Burns <dburns@mozilla.com> wrote:
>
>> Sorry for the late chime in.
>>
>> I would agree with Ken after looking at what our current proposal[1]
>> creates! Just hanging it off WebElement and then searching from there with
>> just a call to get all the shadow roots which returns a list of WebElements
>> and element[<index>].find_element('<type>', '<identifier of node>').
>>
>> Marc and Ken, do you want to take a bash at updating the spec to contain
>> what we have discussed here and uploading a patch to the W3C Bug[2] ?
>>
>> David
>>
>> [1]
>> https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/selenium-developers/Dad2KZsXNKo
>> [2]
>>
>> https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=22987
>>
>>
>> On 20/08/2013 21:07, Ken Kania wrote:
>>
>> You understand correctly. I thought most stuff would work fine since I
>> think we allow the Document to be treated as a WebElement, but there might
>> be some stuff that needs to be fixed or perhaps throw an error for.
>>
>>
>> On Mon, Aug 19, 2013 at 2:05 PM, Marc Fisher <fisherii@google.com> wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> They would be scoped based on the element id you give to search under
>>>>
>>>
>>> So the command to get the shadow roots from a WebElement would return
>>> a list of WebElements? Shadow roots aren't actually HTML element objects,
>>> but I suppose from the POV of WebDriver that that doesn't actually matter
>>> very much. It does probably mean that most of the element/:elementId/...
>>> commands will fail if the :elementId corresponds to a shadow root (or they
>>> could be redirected to the owning HTML element I suppose).
>>>
>>> I would be fine with this suggestion, assuming I understand it
>>> correctly.
>>>
>>> Marc
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>
Received on Thursday, 5 September 2013 17:25:20 UTC