> On Feb 15, 2014, at 4:57 PM, Ryosuke Niwa <rn...@apple.com> wrote:
> Hi all,
> I’d like to propose one solution for
> [Shadow]: Specify imperative API for node distribution
> https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=18429
> because select content attribute doesn’t satisfy the needs of 
> framework/library authors to support conditionals in their templates,
> and doesn’t satisfy my random image element use case below.
> == Use Case ==
> Random image element is a custom element that shows one of child img elements 
> chosen uniformally random.
> e.g. the markup of a document that uses random-image-element may look like 
> this:
> <random-image-element>
>   <img src="kitten.jpg">
>   <img src="cat.jpg">
>   <img src="webkitten.jpg">
> </random-image-element>
> random-image-element displays one out of the three img child elements when a 
> user clicks on it.
> As an author of this element, I could modify the DOM and add style content 
> attribute directly on those elements
> but I would rather use shadow DOM to encapsulate the implementation.
> == API Proposal ==
> Add two methods void add(Element) and void remove(Element) to content element.
> (We can give them more descriptive names. I matched select element for now).
> Each content element has an ordered list of *explicitly inserted nodes*.
> add(Element element) must act according to the following algorithm:
> If the content element's shadow host's node tree doesn't contain _element_, 
> throw HierarchyRequestError.
> If element is already in some other content element's _explicitly inserted 
> nodes_
> then call remove with _element_ on that content element.
> Append _element_ to the end of _explicitly inserted nodes_.
> remove(Element element) must act according to the following algorithm:
> If the content element's _explicitly inserted nodes_ does not contain 
> _element_, throw NotFoundError.
> Remove _element_ from _explicitly inserted nodes_.
> The idea here is that _explicitly inserted nodes_ of an insertion point A 
> would be the list of distributed nodes of A but
> I haven't figured out exactly how _explicitly inserted nodes_ should interact 
> with select content attribute.
> I think the simplest model would be _explicitly inserted nodes_ simply 
> overriding whatever select content attribute was
> trying to do but I don't have a strong opinion about how they should interact 
> yet.
> I don't think it makes sense to support redistributions, etc... at least in 
> the initial API.
> This proposal has an advantage over the existing proposal on 
> https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=18429:
> It doesn't require UA calling back to JS constantly to match elements
> Point 1 implies we don't expose when distribution happens for select content 
> attribute.
I'm sorry I don't know what was reading. The strawman proposal on the bug is 
basically what I'm "proposing".  add/remove are simply on distributedChildren 

In fact, the stated design is probably better than what I have here now that we 
have getDistributedNodes() on content element.

I think we just need to turn that into a Static/Live NodeList with add/remove.  
I would prefer the name distributedNodes.

One important implication of adding this API surface is that the node 
distribution from declarative syntax also needs to happen at the end of each 
micro task as opposed to happen implicitly after each DOM mutation if we wanted 
to formulate the mutation observer as a way of implementing "select" content 

Since this is visible to the scripts, it's important to take it into the 
account in the level 1 specification.

- R. Niwa

Reply via email to