Re: [webcomponents]: Making Shadow DOM Subtrees Traversable

What about obscured, opaque, invisible, or restricted?


On Tue, Mar 12, 2013 at 3:34 PM, Alan Stearns <stearns@adobe.com> wrote:

> On 3/12/13 2:41 PM, "Boris Zbarsky" <bzbarsky@MIT.EDU> wrote:
>
> >On 3/12/13 5:19 PM, Dimitri Glazkov wrote:
> >> However, to allow developers a degree of enforcing integrity of their
> >> shadow trees, we are going add a new mode, an equivalent of a "KEEP OUT"
> >> sign, if you will, which will makes a shadow tree non-traversable,
> >> effectively skipping over it in an element's shadow tree stack.
> >
> >To be clear, what this mode does is turn off the simple way of getting
> >the shadow tree.  It does not promise that someone can't get at the
> >shadow tree via various non-obvious methods, because in practice such
> >promises are empty as long as script inside the component runs against
> >the web page global.
> >
> >The question is how to name this.  "Hidden" seems to promise too much to
> >me.  Perhaps "obfuscated"?  "Veiled"?
> >
> >-Boris
> >
> >P.S.  Tempting as it is, "RedWithGreenPolkadots" is probably not an OK
> >name for this bikeshed.
>
> Apologies in advance for adding to the bikeshedding
>
> protected (mostly private, but you can get around it)
> shielded (the shield can be lowered)
> gated (the gate can be opened)
> fenced (most fences have an opening)
>
> Or bleenish-grue, if we're going with color names.
>
> Alan
>
>