Re: [webcomponents] [Shadow]: rename <content> to <slot> (bugzilla: 28561) (#92)

For what it’s worth, I share Hayato's concern that ::slot suggests it’s targeting the slot itself, not the distributed nodes.

I think it’s more important to have the combinator’s name suggest its intent than to have its name exactly match that of the <slot> element. To the extent that the #foo::content combinator was clear before, I think it worked because it could be read as “the content of #foo”, not just because the combinator’s name matched the element name <content>.

I like Ryosuke’s goal of avoiding new terms like “distributed” if possible. I also agree with him that ::content on its own is too vague.

Of the proposals discussed so far, I believe ::slot-content strikes the best balance of: a) implying a connection to the <slot> element, and b) being reasonably intuitive.


> On Jun 10, 2015, at 3:48 PM, Tab Atkins Jr. <notifications@github.com> wrote:
> 
> If the behavior is the same, then yeah, ::slot seems like the best name.
> 
> —
> Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub <https://github.com/w3c/webcomponents/issues/92#issuecomment-110939785>.
> 



---
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
https://github.com/w3c/webcomponents/issues/92#issuecomment-110945944