- From: smaug---- <notifications@github.com>
- Date: Mon, 20 Jun 2016 02:26:02 -0700
- To: w3c/webcomponents <webcomponents@noreply.github.com>
- Cc:
Received on Monday, 20 June 2016 09:26:30 UTC
Why wouldn't this be an important issue? I'm still rather strongly against using the same session history for shadow iframes, since it causes really unexpected behavior. And of course there isn't interoperability risk atm if there are no browsers shipping Shadow DOMv1, we can ship whatever random stuff at that point. The thing is that we need to get this kind of core issues sorted out before anyone ships, otherwise we'll end up to the same mess we have/had with previous Shadow DOM version. (Is it v0) --- 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/184#issuecomment-227092626
Received on Monday, 20 June 2016 09:26:30 UTC