Re: Mozilla and the Shadow DOM

Updated https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=28446 with the
latest, to keep the history in bug.

:DG<

On Thu, Apr 16, 2015 at 7:52 AM, Dimitri Glazkov <dglazkov@google.com>
wrote:

> On Thu, Apr 16, 2015 at 7:07 AM, Wilson Page <wilsonpage@me.com> wrote:
>
>> This is an interesting approach that didn't occur to me! Similar to
>> Anne's concerns, this would require you to have more knowledge of the
>> internals of the super-class component. If you own both components then
>> this is fine.
>>
>
> Yes, the main problem here is the degree of separation between creator and
> consumer of the base component. The higher the degree, the less inclined
> the creator will be to expose innards of the shadow tree to the consumer.
>
> Multiple shadow roots solves the same problem as shadow trees (provides a
> composition contract), but along the inheritance chain.
>
> For example, multiple shadow roots make sense:
>
> * if you are a maker of UI library that's strongly rooted in inheritance
> and intend to for your base components to be used directly;
>
> * if you are hoping to inherit from components with closed shadow trees.
>
>
>> Also if this means we can remove a complex piece from the spec to help
>> reach consensus, great! :)
>>
>
> Whatever it takes.
>
> :DG<
>