[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 #20 from Hayato Ito <hayato@chromium.org> ---
Yeah, this is super critical. How should we proceed? I appreciate advice from
experienced spec editors.

Here is very rough current plan how to proceed:

1. Define good terminologies, as I described in comment 10, so that we can use
these terms to update specs.

   This might be important because well defined terminologies would make it
easy to update the spec.
   To define a good terminology set, we might want to pick up some concrete
examples from currently filed bugs so that the terminology set is really
helpful.

2. Go though specs and file bugs.

  - Which specs should we take care of? DOM and HTML and... maybe all?
  - Should we manage the list of relevant bugs in W3c bugzilla? 
    e.g. One master (meta) bug and other relevant bugs which depends on the
meta-bug.

3. Use our best judgement and update the spec in each filed bug.


(In reply to Ian 'Hixie' Hickson from comment #18)
> Seems like this should include cases like how radio buttons pick their radio
> button group, how scripts decide if they should execute (and if they do,
> whether document.currentScript is the right API to update when they
> execute), how labels decide what controls they are labelling, how
> getElementById() and getElementsByTagName() work, whether iframes should
> load in shadow trees, what gets included in APIs like document.links, how
> image maps are found, how target=""s are found, etc.
> 
> This seems pretty critical.

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

Received on Tuesday, 30 September 2014 07:12:11 UTC