Re: drawsystemfocusring/drawcustomfocusring

On 12/11/13, 4:50 PM, Jay Munro wrote:
>
> By definition, “notional” is defined as imaginary, hypothetical, 
> theoretical, or an idea. The fallback elements in Canvas have been 
> termed the “shadow DOM”, but they are part of the DOM. If the browser 
> doesn’t support Canvas, then the elements are shown. I’m hesitating to 
> introduce a new term (notional child/children) as I’m not sure using 
> it would make it clearer. I’d rather use “hidden” or “fallback 
> elements” and see the action defined, than label them with a new term.
>

I think we've been referring to them as elements within the Canvas 
sub-tree. Years ago they were called "shadow", long before the current 
web components spec (which has its own shadow DOM), but that's since 
changed.

They are full citizens of the DOM -- they are active regardless of 
whether or not the browser supports Canvas.

e.g.

<canvas><img src="/something.png" /></canvas>

That img tag is very much alive. It's just more-or-less that the css for 
the document supporting canvas is:
canvas > * { display: none; }


We don't yet have a semantic for say, "display: virtual".
We don't yet have solid semantics for a "virtual-*" family either.

There's "-fx-shape" in JavaFX, and "clip-path" as an SVG proposal.

We stayed away from using existing CSS width/height/positioning, as 
those are important for actual fallback use.
We do not have a semantic for toggling the availability of "fallback" 
via CSS, but it's easy enough with JS to simply switch canvas tags to 
divs (or some other tag).


I feel I've gone off on a tangent, so I'll just stop there.

-Charles