W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-webapps@w3.org > January to March 2015

Re: Shadow tree style isolation primitive

From: Tab Atkins Jr. <jackalmage@gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 5 Feb 2015 11:37:22 +1100
Message-ID: <CAAWBYDCu0MVOZmOjcrJcxaj8u8ga9=igx=s-or6855jgDvHhCg@mail.gmail.com>
To: Olli Pettay <olli@pettay.fi>
Cc: Brian Kardell <bkardell@gmail.com>, Dimitri Glazkov <dglazkov@google.com>, "www-style@w3.org" <www-style@w3.org>, WebApps WG <public-webapps@w3.org>
On Thu, Feb 5, 2015 at 11:03 AM, Olli Pettay <olli@pettay.fi> wrote:
> On 02/05/2015 01:20 AM, Tab Atkins Jr. wrote:
>> You don't need strong isolation primitives to do a lot of good.
>> Simple composition helpers lift an *enormous* weight off the shoulders
>> of web devs, and make whole classes of bugs obsolete.  Shadow DOM is
>> precisely that composition helper right now.  In most contexts, you
>> can't ever touch something inside of shadow DOM unless you're doing it
>> on purpose, so there's no way to "friendly fire" (as Brian puts it).
>
> If we want to just help with composition, then we can find simpler
> model than shadow DOM with its multiple shadow root per host and event
> handling
> oddities and what not. (and all the mess with is-in-doc is still something
> to be sorted out etc.)

Try to. ^_^

>> Stronger isolation does solve some problems, sure.  But trying to
>> imply that those are the only problems we need to solve,
>
> No one has tried to imply that. I don't know where you got that.

By your statements implying that composition issues can just be
handled by better discipline and some selector modification, in the
message I responded to earlier.  I'm not sure how to interpret those
statement if you didn't mean that composition wasn't worth solving.

~TJ
Received on Thursday, 5 February 2015 00:38:12 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Friday, 27 October 2017 07:27:25 UTC