W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-webapps@w3.org > October to December 2014

Re: [shadow dom] relitigation

From: Brian Kardell <bkardell@gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 17 Dec 2014 16:18:39 -0700
Message-ID: <CADC=+jdLT2XgoY5+F5ePNVjWc_VFKFWbG-+-Eq_ok+8N_D1Nzg@mail.gmail.com>
To: Ryosuke Niwa <rniwa@apple.com>
Cc: "public-webapps@w3.org" <public-webapps@w3.org>
On Wed, Dec 17, 2014 at 3:24 PM, Ryosuke Niwa <rniwa@apple.com> wrote:
>
> Hi Brian,
>
> The WebKit team has given a lot of feedback over the years on the Shadow
> DOM spec.  We wouldn't have done that if we didn't care about it. :)  We're
> excited to hear that Mozilla is planning to give more feedback on Custom
> Elements and Shadow DOM because we feel that much of their feedback
> resonates with us.
>
> Having said that, our feedback has largely been dismissed or has not been
> adequately addressed.  I'm sure you can imagine that this does not
> encourage us to invest much more time or effort into providing additional
> feedback.
>
> - R. Niwa
>
>
Ryosuke,

Thanks for your response.

I can definitely appreciate that when you sink time into discussion and
things don't appear to go that way it seems frustrating and doesn't promote
good feelings about investing further.  At the same time, I'm sure you can
appreciate that this leaves things in a frustrating/confusing spot for so
many developers and their orgs around the world because of where this
particular piece of the puzzle lies.  I'm glad to hear that Mozilla's
position/feedback resonates but I'm still unclear.

I have followed all of these discussions pretty closely and even today
after some searching I am not sure about which feedback regarding Shadow
DOM specifically you feel still requires addressing?  Discussion about type
1, 2 boundary seems to have died off - was there some other?  Is there any
hope of resolving that if that's what you mean, or would this require
significant change?

Here's what I actually am unclear on at the end of the day:  Technicalities
around REC or process or politics aside - If we wind up with two
interoperable implementations in FF and Blink, will you still feel there is
something that needs addressing before sending the positive signal that
it'll eventually get implemented in Webkit?  If so, I feel like, as a
developer, now is the time I'd like to learn that.  Just as it is
frustrating to you above - it seems will be all the more frustrating for
everyone if that becomes the case and honestly, the development world is
just guessing what may be wildly uninformed guesses... That seems bad.  If
we need to have hard discussions, let's have them and get it out of the way
even if the result is something somewhat less than a commitment.

That's my 2 cents, anyway.  I'm not the chair, I'm not even a member - it's
just something I hear a lot of people discussing and thought worth bringing
into the open.


Brian Kardell :: @briankardell :: hitchjs.com
Received on Wednesday, 17 December 2014 23:19:06 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 18:14:32 UTC