- From: <bugzilla@jessica.w3.org>
- Date: Tue, 25 Jun 2013 14:58:19 +0000
- To: public-webapps-bugzilla@w3.org
https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=22455
Bug ID: 22455
Summary: [Custom]: Consider inserting unresolved elements at
the start of the map.
Classification: Unclassified
Product: WebAppsWG
Version: unspecified
Hardware: PC
OS: Linux
Status: NEW
Severity: normal
Priority: P2
Component: Component Model
Assignee: dglazkov@chromium.org
Reporter: dominicc@chromium.org
QA Contact: public-webapps-bugzilla@w3.org
Blocks: 14968
"Whenever an unresolved element is created, it must be added to the upgrade
candidates map."
It would be good to clarify what order is implied here. Does "added" mean
"added to the end of a list"?
Consider three hypothetical fragments of markup A B C that are each markup for
a custom element, and a script S which registers the custom elements in ABC.
If the document is structured SABC then the ready callbacks are delivered in
order CBA per Section 7 ("Place ... at the front of the ... queue.")
However if the document is structured ABCS then the order in which the ready
callbacks are delivered is unclear, but it is presumably ABC.
Is this interpretation correct? Is this seeming inconsistency desirable? (I
guess it will encourage authors to be robust to initialization order, or if
they desire a stable order, put their registration script last which has the
side-effect of doing depth-first initialization which is pretty nice.)
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are the QA Contact for the bug.
Received on Tuesday, 25 June 2013 14:58:21 UTC