- From: <bugzilla@jessica.w3.org>
- Date: Mon, 22 Dec 2014 07:55:31 +0000
- To: public-webapps-bugzilla@w3.org
https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=27222 --- Comment #17 from Koji Ishii <kojiishi@gmail.com> --- (In reply to Hayato Ito from comment #16) > Although the current Shadow DOM spec mentions that 'contenteditable must not > propagate' [1] explicitly, I think that's redundant in a strict meaning. > > Unless otherwise mentioned, all attributes must not *propagate* from shadow > host to shadow trees because there is no parent/child relationship between > nodes if they are in the different node trees. That's my interpretation of > the spec. > > I'm afraid that mentioning only contenteditable attribute in the spec is > likely for readers to have an impression that other attributes may > *propagate. That's not good. Agreed, I was thinking the same. We should normatively define things to propagate and/or to use composed tree. When helpful, we could informatively say this and that, not limited to, do not propagate and handle each tree as separated. That should clarify what to happen to attributes not mentioned in the spec. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are the QA Contact for the bug.
Received on Monday, 22 December 2014 07:55:32 UTC