[Bug 26365] [Shadow]: Need an equivalent definition of 'in a Document' for shadow trees

https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=26365

--- Comment #28 from Hayato Ito <hayato@chromium.org> ---
I am okay that we should exclude f and g from *D*.

That made me think about yet another case. Suppose that node #c (or #d) has a
shadow tree, do we consider the shadow tree hosted by #c (or #d)
*disconnected*?

That means the shadow host, #c, itself is not disconnected, but the nodes in
the shadow tree hosted by the shadow host, #c, are disconnected. Is it weird?


If you notice any other missing case, please let me know that.


BTW, if someone has a good naming candidate for *D*, it's highly welcome.

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are the QA Contact for the bug.

Received on Thursday, 6 November 2014 22:06:19 UTC