Re: [webcomponents] Encapsulation and defaulting to open vs closed (was in www-style)

Thanks for the clarifications, Arthur!

On Feb 10, 2014, at 11:08 AM, Arthur Barstow <art.barstow@nokia.com> wrote:

> On 2/6/14 9:06 PM, ext Ryosuke Niwa wrote:
>> Could chairs of the working group please clarify whether we have had a reach of consensus on the default encapsulation level in shadow DOM?
> 
> As described in [WorkMode], WebApps' asynchronous participation and edit first "work modes" means group members must actively participate on the list and actively file bugs and participate in bug reports. We also expect both Editors and group participants to work toward obtaining broad consensus as described in the charter [Decisions].

Thanks for remaining me, and in fact, we’re aware of this.   We were simply surprised that other participants of the working group thought there was a consensus on this matter because it wasn’t our understanding of the situation but we didn’t want to jump to any conclusion.

>> More concretely, have we _decided_ that we only want Type 1 encapsulation for the level 1 specifications of Web components instead of Type 2 or Type 1 and Type 2 encapsulations as defined in Maciej's email sent out in June 29th, 2011:
>> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-webapps/2011AprJun/1364.html
>> 
>> I don't recall any consensus being reached about this matter.
>> 
>> In fact, http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-webapps/2012OctDec/thread.html#msg312
>> (referred by http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-style/2014Feb/0221.html)
>> clearly shows the lack of consensus in my eyes as both Boris Zbarsky from Mozilla and Maciej Stachowiak from Apple have voiced to prefer Type 2 encapsulation:
>> 
>> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-webapps/2012OctDec/0406.html
>> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-webapps/2012OctDec/0421.html
>> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-webapps/2012OctDec/0628.html
>> 
>> while representatives of Google preferring Type 1 encapsulations.
> 
> I agree the threads started by Maciej at [1364.html] and Dimitri at [0312.html] do not appear to have reached broad consensus. (I am not subscribed to www-style so I haven't followed those discussions.)

Great.  That is my understanding as well.

> Dimitri, Maciej, Ryosuke - is there a mutually agreeable solution here?

I think the contention here is about which types of encapsulations need to be supported in the level 1 specifications.  It would be great to sort it out somehow because it’s hard to discuss specifics unless we’ve agreed upon the use cases and requirements for them first.

- R. Niwa

Received on Tuesday, 11 February 2014 22:56:07 UTC