- From: Dimitri Glazkov <dglazkov@chromium.org>
- Date: Sat, 30 Jun 2012 15:24:02 -0700
- To: Jonas Sicking <jonas@sicking.cc>
- Cc: Elliott Sprehn <esprehn@gmail.com>, www-dom <www-dom@w3.org>
On Fri, Jun 29, 2012 at 6:17 PM, Jonas Sicking <jonas@sicking.cc> wrote: > > > This seems like yet another reason to make the root of the shadow tree > be an element rather than a DocumentFragment. In the component model > spec we're likely going to be creating shadow trees by cloning > <template> elements, so it seems to make a lot of sense to me to use > that cloned <template> element as the shadow tree, rather than > conceptually moving all the children over to this, arguably somewhat > awkward, DocumentFragment subclass. It's an interesting idea. From my perspective, ShadowRoot is nothing like an element in a general sense: it has no tag name or attributes. It has its fairly unique scoping requirements and events, and styling boundaries. Making it a DocumentFragment-like thing has the advantage of never worrying about accidentally detaching the shadow root from its host by an errant DOM operation: document.body.appendChild(someShadowRoot); // only moves its children And it also explains how the template nodes enter that special world of a separate scope: shadowRoot.appendChild(someTemplateElement.content); At this point, I just don't see how we can make it and the template element be the same thing. However, I am happy to hear a good argument for this. Merging HTMLTemplateElement and ShadowRoot is intriguing. Can you maybe file a bug on this and post your thoughts on it? Handy link here: http://goo.gl/KiaWc > > / Jonas >
Received on Saturday, 30 June 2012 22:24:30 UTC