In your example, you lost me on this part:
// Insert Bob's shadow tree under the election story box.
root.appendChild(document.createElement('shadow'));
Is that wrong? If not, can you explain it? also... How does this patter
give browsers timely enough information to avoid fouc? It feels like
On Fri, Dec 23, 2011 at 5:23 AM, Brian Kardell bkard...@gmail.com wrote:
In your example, you lost me on this part:
// Insert Bob's shadow tree under the election story box.
root.appendChild(document.createElement('shadow'));
Is that wrong? If not, can you explain it?
Sure. Since Alice's
On Dec 23, 2011 1:00 PM, Dimitri Glazkov dglaz...@chromium.org wrote:
On Fri, Dec 23, 2011 at 5:23 AM, Brian Kardell bkard...@gmail.com wrote:
In your example, you lost me on this part:
// Insert Bob's shadow tree under the election story box.
On Fri, Dec 23, 2011 at 10:37 AM, Brian Kardell bkard...@gmail.com wrote:
On Dec 23, 2011 1:00 PM, Dimitri Glazkov dglaz...@chromium.org wrote:
On Fri, Dec 23, 2011 at 5:23 AM, Brian Kardell bkard...@gmail.com wrote:
In your example, you lost me on this part:
// Insert Bob's shadow tree
ShadowRoot is a Node, so all of the typical DOM accessors apply. Is
this what you had in mind?
CSSOM interfaces are attached to the document specifically though - right?
And they (at least that I can recall) have no association concept with
scope (yet)... So I think that implies that unless
Good job!
https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=712622
On 12/21/2011 01:23 AM, Dimitri Glazkov wrote:
Happy Holidays!
In the joyous spirit of sharing, I present you with a first draft of
the Shadow DOM Specification:
On Thu, Dec 22, 2011 at 7:10 AM, Brian Kardell bkard...@gmail.com wrote:
ShadowRoot is a Node, so all of the typical DOM accessors apply. Is
this what you had in mind?
CSSOM interfaces are attached to the document specifically though - right?
And they (at least that I can recall) have no
On Thu, Dec 22, 2011 at 3:15 PM, Dimitri Glazkov dglaz...@chromium.orgwrote:
On Thu, Dec 22, 2011 at 7:10 AM, Brian Kardell bkard...@gmail.com wrote:
ShadowRoot is a Node, so all of the typical DOM accessors apply. Is
this what you had in mind?
CSSOM interfaces are attached to the
On Thu, Dec 22, 2011 at 12:49 PM, Brian Kardell bkard...@gmail.com wrote:
On Thu, Dec 22, 2011 at 3:15 PM, Dimitri Glazkov dglaz...@chromium.org
wrote:
On Thu, Dec 22, 2011 at 7:10 AM, Brian Kardell bkard...@gmail.com wrote:
ShadowRoot is a Node, so all of the typical DOM accessors apply.
So... I was going to ask a follow up here but as I tried to formulate I
went back to the draft and it became kind of clear that I don't actually
understand shadow or content elements at all... ShadowRoot has a
constructor, but it doesn't seem to have anything in its signature that
would give you
On Thu, Dec 22, 2011 at 1:56 PM, Brian Kardell bkard...@gmail.com wrote:
So... I was going to ask a follow up here but as I tried to formulate I went
back to the draft and it became kind of clear that I don't actually
understand shadow or content elements at all... ShadowRoot has a
BTW, added an example:
dvcs.w3.org/hg/webcomponents/raw-file/tip/spec/shadow/index.html#shadow-dom-example
:DG
On Tue, Dec 20, 2011 at 5:38 PM, Brian Kardell bkard...@gmail.com wrote:
Yes, I had almost the same thought, though why not just require a prefix?
I also think some examples actually showing some handling of events and use
of css would be really helpful here... The upper boundary for css vs
Happy Holidays!
In the joyous spirit of sharing, I present you with a first draft of
the Shadow DOM Specification:
http://dvcs.w3.org/hg/webcomponents/raw-file/tip/spec/shadow/index.html
It's not quite a Christmas miracle, more like that extra unlabeled
gift box you found in the drapes while
Hi Dimitri,
You wrote:
In the joyous spirit of sharing, I present you with a first draft of
the Shadow DOM Specification:
http://dvcs.w3.org/hg/webcomponents/raw-file/tip/spec/shadow/index.html
Awesome. Thanks for writing this up! Obviously, I'll have to read this
more closely while hiding
On 12/20/11 4:49 PM, Edward O'Connor wrote:
#player::controls
I'm worried that users may stomp all over the CSS WG's ability to mint
future pseudo-element names. I'd rather use a functional syntax to
distinguish between custom, user-defined pseudo-elements and
engine-supplied, CSS
On Tue, Dec 20, 2011 at 4:49 PM, Edward O'Connor eocon...@apple.com wrote:
Hi Dimitri,
You wrote:
In the joyous spirit of sharing, I present you with a first draft of
the Shadow DOM Specification:
http://dvcs.w3.org/hg/webcomponents/raw-file/tip/spec/shadow/index.html
Awesome. Thanks for
Yes, I had almost the same thought, though why not just require a prefix?
I also think some examples actually showing some handling of events and use
of css would be really helpful here... The upper boundary for css vs
inheritance I think would be made especially easier to understand with a
good
18 matches
Mail list logo