Re: [w3c/webcomponents] Need "slotchange" event (#288)

>  I don't see a reason to special case fallback content. It should just end up being assigned if there only is fallback content.

Yeah, I am feeling that "Not considering fallback contents as assigned nodes" is making the algorithms around here complicated. However, that's the conclusion in https://github.com/w3c/webcomponents/issues/317.

I am open to either option:

1. Preserve the status quo. "assigned nodes" does not includes the fallback contents.
2. Let the definition of "assigned nodes" include the fallback contents too.

@rniwa , WDTY?
2 is a relatively huge change for the spec. I have to update a lot of places... :(

---
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
https://github.com/w3c/webcomponents/issues/288#issuecomment-211294527