- From: Anne van Kesteren <annevk@annevk.nl>
- Date: Wed, 6 May 2015 17:30:32 +0200
- To: "Tab Atkins Jr." <jackalmage@gmail.com>
- Cc: Elliott Sprehn <esprehn@chromium.org>, "www-style@w3.org" <www-style@w3.org>, "L. David Baron" <dbaron@dbaron.org>, WebApps WG <public-webapps@w3.org>
On Wed, May 6, 2015 at 4:18 PM, Tab Atkins Jr. <jackalmage@gmail.com> wrote: > On Tue, May 5, 2015 at 10:56 PM, Anne van Kesteren <annevk@annevk.nl> wrote: >> And again, from the perspective of the shadow tree, the host element >> is not part of its normal DOM. The shadow tree is its normal DOM. This >> is the same as ::-webkit-range-thumb. From the perspective of the >> light DOM, that element is not part of its normal DOM. But it is part >> of the composed DOM. > > And again, it depends on what level of authority you're talking about. > As far as the outer page is concerned, the <input> element is empty, > and ::webkit-range-thumb is a fictitious pseudo-element created solely > by the platform. There's no real DOM underlying it, because the > shadow dom is fully sealed, so anything inside of it is dead. > > From the platform's perspective, sure, there's a real element under > there. And the platform does get special powers that the page might > not have. But the fact that <input> is implemented with shadow DOM is > an undetectable implementation detail at the moment. A) This platform advantage will go away. Isolated shadow DOM is going to be a thing developers can play with. B) At the F2F there was lots of talk that even with custom properties, there was still a desire to support custom pseudo-elements to target actual elements in a way similar to what (mostly) WebKit/Blink offer today. -- https://annevankesteren.nl/
Received on Wednesday, 6 May 2015 15:31:02 UTC