Re: [whatwg/dom] Declarative Shadow DOM (#510)

I agree with @mildred.  The "disappearing" elements approach is counter-intuitive, no other elements in HTML work that way right now and the current proposal has lots of confusing behaviour that means a `<shadowroot>` element can produce either nothing (the element is removed), a `HTMLShadowRootElement` or a `HTMLUnknownElement`.  There's no consideration to CSS `:nth-child()` or sibling combinator selectors; slow browser adoption would mean that these would behave differently in each browser.  Even `<script>`, a single-use element that is no longer needed after it becomes connected, is not removed from the tree, and `<!DOCTYPE>` also leaves a traversable node in the tree.

@hayatoito 

> Descendant nodes of declarative shadow dom are effectively NOT inert, from user's perspective.

A template doesn't really have descendant nodes from a spec perspective, its contents aren't parsed as its children.  You could quite easily suggest this can be the case for a shadow root too, but instead of hanging around until you clone them, the contents are automatically cloned into a shadow tree.

-- 
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
https://github.com/whatwg/dom/issues/510#issuecomment-460186502