- From: Hayato Ito <notifications@github.com>
- Date: Wed, 03 Jun 2015 19:03:16 -0700
- To: w3c/webcomponents <webcomponents@noreply.github.com>
Received on Thursday, 4 June 2015 02:04:10 UTC
I guess we don't have to be in a hurry to have a good naming for the API. That shouldn't block browser vendors to start to implement Shadow DOM, right? We can change it later as long as it's not shipped, hopefully. For now, let me summarize the ideas we have seen so far: 1. createShadowRoot({mode: 'open' | 'closed'}) - The current spec 2. createShadowRoot({censored: true | false}) 3. createShadowRoot({visible | hidden | isolated}) Also, AFAIR, I've heard an opinion that we might want to use the new name for the API, which is different name from the current name, (parameterless) createShadowRoot. I guess this matters only for Blink. For me, re-using same name is okay, as of now. --- Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub: https://github.com/w3c/webcomponents/issues/100#issuecomment-108680646
Received on Thursday, 4 June 2015 02:04:10 UTC