W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-webapps@w3.org > July to September 2011

Re: [Component Model]: Shadow DOM Subtree per element: One or Many?

From: Dominic Cooney <dominicc@google.com>
Date: Thu, 25 Aug 2011 06:38:15 +0900
Message-ID: <CAHnmYQ9xmezW4Utt7vjkycpuwXEGDu7k_448Fs7x1M_dY7bD=Q@mail.gmail.com>
To: Dimitri Glazkov <dglazkov@chromium.org>
Cc: Erik Arvidsson <arv@chromium.org>, public-webapps <public-webapps@w3.org>, Adam Barth <w3c@adambarth.com>, Alex Russell <slightlyoff@google.com>, MarkM Miller <erights@google.com>
On Thu, Aug 25, 2011 at 4:37 AM, Dimitri Glazkov <dglazkov@chromium.org> wrote:
> On Wed, Aug 24, 2011 at 12:19 PM, Erik Arvidsson <arv@chromium.org> wrote:
>> On Wed, Aug 24, 2011 at 10:44, Dimitri Glazkov <dglazkov@chromium.org> wrote:
>>> What do you think?
>> +1
>> It would surely allow certain use cases to be covered that are not
>> covered today with form control elements.
>> How about not throwing on new ShadowTree(element) and just append a
>> new shadow root after the existing ones?
> That would make the order "as instantiated", which is totally fine by
> me. It would be good to add a use case which describes the need for
> this. Anyone got a good idea? Don't want to reuse Adam's autocomplete
> one, since HTML already provides a solution.

+1 to finding a use case. When I try to think of one, I usually end up
with: I would rather do this using composition. The only benefit of
multiple shadows over composition is that I don’t need to forward most
of the API to the primary part of the composition.

One big question for me is: Do you expect multiple shadows to be
designed to work together, or come from multiple independent sources
(like different script libraries)?

> :DG<
>> --
>> erik
Received on Wednesday, 24 August 2011 21:38:43 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 18:13:23 UTC