We have experimented with patching dom traversal and mutation api's, and
there's an experimental import in Polymer that does this. It can let some
libraries interoperate more smoothly with Shady DOM powered elements that,
for example, perform distribution. We're continuing to work on it and
explore if it should be integrated out of the box or be available as an opt
in layer.

On Tue, May 19, 2015 at 6:09 AM, <[email protected]> wrote:

> Was there a reason that the built-in versions of the Polymer.dom API
> couldn't be monkeypatched?  In other words, why not make
> document.querySelector or element.querySelector behave like Polymer.dom's
> version?  Wouldn't this increase interoperability with third party
> libraries?
>
> Follow Polymer on Google+: plus.google.com/107187849809354688692
> ---
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
> "Polymer" group.
> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an
> email to [email protected].
> To view this discussion on the web visit
> https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/polymer-dev/2ed4c38f-8544-4a29-b79d-aad0ee0c40aa%40googlegroups.com
> .
> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
>

Follow Polymer on Google+: plus.google.com/107187849809354688692
--- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Polymer" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to [email protected].
To view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/polymer-dev/CA%2BrMWZhJJtkY_jKm8mSaLavGj3tRSk8Gonka%3DVfgEdD%2BoUaBeQ%40mail.gmail.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Reply via email to