- From: <bugzilla@jessica.w3.org>
- Date: Mon, 17 Mar 2014 04:44:16 +0000
- To: public-webapps-bugzilla@w3.org
https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=22141 --- Comment #11 from Hayato Ito <hayato@chromium.org> --- FYI, In blink, I've reverted the change of "node.contains": https://codereview.chromium.org/197283016/ (In reply to Elliott Sprehn from comment #10) > (In reply to Hayato Ito from comment #9) > > If we go for idea B, we need API to satisfy the original requirement. > > > > Because node.inComposedTree() is just an tentative idea, I appreciate > > opinions for better API to satisfy the requirement. > > > > Other ideas: > > - document.containsInComposedTree(node) - I think this is preferred. > > > > Any ideas are welcome! > > I think there's two separate questions here, Document.contains and > Node.contains seem like totally separate questions. > > "Am I in this Document" > "Am I a child of this Node" Agreed. IMO, we should avoid such a double meaning. We should have a more explicit API instead of re-using 'document.contains'. > > Now that we have ShadowRoot.host you can actually walk up to the root and > get the answer you want though, so perhaps reverting this is okay. We should > probably add an inDocument() method though. Yeah, we should discuss further to pursuit a good API. I'd like to hear opinions from developers to address their use cases. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are the QA Contact for the bug.
Received on Monday, 17 March 2014 04:44:18 UTC