W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-style@w3.org > February 2014

Re: Shadow DOM: Hat and Cat -- if that's your real name.

From: Tab Atkins Jr. <jackalmage@gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 4 Feb 2014 14:59:22 -0800
Message-ID: <CAAWBYDDUKmj=SAzkB1bTWeiXVtnyYvxkno69_H6uE5JS2Fs-fA@mail.gmail.com>
To: "Robert O'Callahan" <robert@ocallahan.org>
Cc: Sylvain Galineau <galineau@adobe.com>, "Edward O'Connor" <eoconnor@apple.com>, www-style list <www-style@w3.org>
On Tue, Feb 4, 2014 at 2:56 PM, Robert O'Callahan <robert@ocallahan.org> wrote:
> On Wed, Feb 5, 2014 at 11:49 AM, Tab Atkins Jr. <jackalmage@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>> On Tue, Feb 4, 2014 at 12:44 PM, Robert O'Callahan <robert@ocallahan.org>
>> wrote:
>> > An expedient approach would be to allow selectors to penetrate the
>> > shadow
>> > DOM by default and in a future spec revision add the ability for
>> > component
>> > authors to opt out of this, along with introducing other features to
>> > support
>> > custom styling.
>> Oh gosh no.  Encapsulation by default is absolutely necessary to avoid
>> the pains of current jquery/etc components, the avoidance of which is
>> the entire point of Shadow DOM.
> Sorry, by "penetrate the shadow DOM" I meant using the combinators that
> Dimitry has proposed, or using the pseudo-element versions.

Oh!  I'm so sorry, I *completely* misunderstood your email.

Yes, that's exactly the plan, actually.  We've just figured out that,
in the general case, we need full shadow-piercing.  We'd like to
explore more restricted methods of piercing that people can opt into
in the future.

Received on Tuesday, 4 February 2014 23:00:10 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Monday, 2 May 2016 14:39:18 UTC