- From: Brian Kardell <bkardell@gmail.com>
- Date: Wed, 10 Apr 2013 13:11:18 -0400
- To: Scott Miles <sjmiles@google.com>
- Cc: Dimitri Glazkov <dglazkov@google.com>, public-webapps <public-webapps@w3.org>, Elliott Sprehn <esprehn@google.com>, Adam Klein <adamk@google.com>, Steve Orvell <sorvell@google.com>, Hajime Morrita <morrita@google.com>, Rafael Weinstein <rafaelw@google.com>, Ojan Vafai <ojan@google.com>, Alex Komoroske <komoroske@google.com>, Matthew McNulty <mmcnulty@google.com>
On Mon, Mar 18, 2013 at 5:05 PM, Scott Miles <sjmiles@google.com> wrote: > I'm already on the record with A, but I have a question about 'lossiness'. > > With my web developer hat on, I wonder why I can't say: > > <div id="foo"> > <shadowroot> > shadow stuff > </shadowroot> > > light stuff > > </div> > > > and then have the value of #foo.innerHTML still be > > <shadowroot> > shadow stuff > </shadowroot> > > lightstuff > > I understand that for DOM, there is a wormhole there and the reality of what > this means is new and frightening; but as a developer it seems to be > perfectly fine as a mental model. > > We web devs like to grossly oversimplify things. :) > > Scott I am also a Web developer and I find that proposal (showing in innerHTML) feels really wrong/unintuitive to me... I think that is actually a feature, not a detriment and easily explainable. I am in a) camp
Received on Wednesday, 10 April 2013 17:11:49 UTC