- From: <bugzilla@jessica.w3.org>
- Date: Wed, 16 May 2012 02:28:19 +0000
- To: public-webapps-bugzilla@w3.org
https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=16176 --- Comment #25 from Hayato Ito <hayato@chromium.org> 2012-05-16 02:28:19 UTC --- Thank you for updating the spec. Looks good to me! We won finally. (In reply to comment #23) > (In reply to comment #22) > > Thank you for updating the spec. Let me reopen again :) > > > > (In reply to comment #20) > > > > > > > > > 1. If there is a DOM node that is a member of CANDIDATES and is in the same subtree as TARGET, let ADJUSTED be this DOM node > > > > > > > > There may be multiple candidates in the same subree. In such case, we should > > > > pick up "the lowest'"candidate from the candidates. > > > > > > Ah. good point. I think I need to change the CANDIDATES collection algorithm to > > > only pick up unique items. > > > > Unfortunately, we may still have multiple candidate nodes in the same tree as a > > result. > > That's because when we climbing up ancestors of relatedTarget, we may > > *re-visit* the same subtree which we already visit before. > > We can see the example in the example tree. > > https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/attachment.cgi?id=1131 > > If an original relatedTarget is F, both B and F will be added to CANDIDATES. > > Yes, we only need to keep the *lowest* node in the CANDIDATES. Because we are > traversing from the bottom, we need to only check whether a node from the > subtree already exists in CANDIDATES. > > > > > > > > If ANCESTOR is not in the same subtree as LAST and ANCESTOR is not an insertion point: > > > > Why do we exclude InserionPoints from candidates? InsertionPoints could be a > > relatedTarget, couldn't we? > > You're right. My bad. > > http://dvcs.w3.org/hg/webcomponents/rev/9f40fd372168 <-- hopefully sticks this > time :) -- Configure bugmail: https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug.
Received on Wednesday, 16 May 2012 02:28:23 UTC