Re: Status of the Shadow DOM Specification

On 2/5/14 12:00 AM, ext Ryosuke Niwa wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Apparently there has been discussions about hats and cats selector combinators in www-style:
> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-style/2014Feb/0032.html
>
> In that Tab (Atkins) from Google made a comment saying that Chrome will be shipping Shadow DOM in the very near future:
> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-style/2014Feb/0036.html
>
> My understanding is that shadow DOM specification is still being chartered by this very WebApps working group, and unless I’m missing something, the specification was not considered stable enough for any browser vendor to ship without prefixes or behind a flag at least in the last TPAC.  In fact, the current working draft has many outstanding issues including issue 6 that says “Hats, ^, and Cats, ^^, selector combinators should be defined in this section.”
>
> Also, the latest working draft doesn’t reflect recent discussions on the various mailing lists.  For example, section 7.1 Ranges and Selections still mentions that selections are to be entirely within a single root: http://w3c.github.io/webcomponents/spec/shadow/#ranges-and-selection but Jonas (Sicking) from Mozilla has made a pretty strong argument for allowing selection to be extended across shadow boundaries following http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-webapps/2013OctDec/0106.html
>
> Am I completely misunderstanding the status of the specification or missing something?

Dimitri - would you please respond to this issue?

As I mentioned about a month ago [AB], I think it would be helpful to 
understand the plans, expectations, etc. for all of the Web Components 
specs. As such, would you please followup on this Dimitri (as you agreed 
in [DG])?

-Thanks, AB

[AB] 
<http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-webapps/2014JanMar/0024.html>
[DG] 
<http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-webapps/2014JanMar/0027.html>

Received on Thursday, 6 February 2014 15:58:35 UTC