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

[Bug 28031] New: Does the destination insertion points include Shadow IP without older trees?

From: <bugzilla@jessica.w3.org>
Date: Mon, 16 Feb 2015 01:49:26 +0000
To: public-webapps@w3.org
Message-ID: <bug-28031-2927@http.www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/>

            Bug ID: 28031
           Summary: Does the destination insertion points include Shadow
                    IP without older trees?
           Product: WebAppsWG
           Version: unspecified
          Hardware: All
                OS: All
            Status: NEW
          Severity: normal
          Priority: P2
         Component: Component Model
          Assignee: dglazkov@chromium.org
          Reporter: kojiishi@gmail.com
        QA Contact: public-webapps-bugzilla@w3.org
                CC: mike@w3.org, public-webapps@w3.org

>From comment 150 of bug 23887.

Consider a tree:


The question is does B's "destination insertion points"[1] include the SIP?

The argument to include is that "3.3 Shadow Insertion Points"[2] defines such
SIP as a valid shadow insertion points.

The argument not to include is that the definition of "destination insertion
points" in "3.4 Distribution Results"[1] says:
> destination insertion points, which consists of insertion points to where the node is distributed

But the sentence looks a bit confusing regardless of this issue, because a node
is distributed only to the final destination point, so the destination
insertion points being a list of "node *is* distributed" looks inaccurate.

So two suggestions here:
1. Fix the 3.4 wording from "is" to "may be". It's inaccurate anyway.
2. Discuss whether such SIP should be included, and if we conclude not to,
change the definition of "3.3 Shadow Insertion Points"[2].

Note that this issue can affect more than event path, such as

[2] http://w3c.github.io/webcomponents/spec/shadow/#shadow-insertion-points

You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
Received on Monday, 16 February 2015 01:49:28 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 18:14:43 UTC