Re: Shadow tree style isolation primitive

On Fri, Jan 9, 2015 at 8:08 AM, Dimitri Glazkov dglaz...@google.com wrote: Here's an attempt from 2012. This approach doesn't work (the trivial plumbing mentioned in the doc is actually highly non-trivial), but maybe it will give some insights to find the right a proper solution:

Re: Shadow tree style isolation primitive

[oof, somehow your latest response flattened all of the quotes] On Mon, Jan 12, 2015 at 4:18 PM, Ryosuke Niwa rn...@apple.com wrote: On Jan 12, 2015, at 4:10 PM, Tab Atkins Jr. jackalm...@gmail.com wrote: ? I didn't mention DOM APIs. I'm referring back to the example you're replying

Re: Shadow tree style isolation primitive

On Mon, Jan 12, 2015 at 3:51 PM, Ryosuke Niwa rn...@apple.com wrote: On Jan 12, 2015, at 2:41 PM, Tab Atkins Jr. jackalm...@gmail.com wrote: On Mon, Jan 12, 2015 at 2:14 PM, Ryosuke Niwa rn...@apple.com wrote: On Jan 12, 2015, at 1:28 PM, Tab Atkins Jr. jackalm...@gmail.com wrote: Let's assume

Re: Shadow tree style isolation primitive

[ryosuke, your mail client keeps producing flattened replies. maybe send as plain-text, not HTML?] On Mon, Jan 12, 2015 at 5:23 PM, Ryosuke Niwa rn...@apple.com wrote: On Jan 12, 2015, at 4:59 PM, Tab Atkins Jr. jackalm...@gmail.com wrote: On Mon, Jan 12, 2015 at 4:18 PM, Ryosuke Niwa rn

Re: Shadow tree style isolation primitive

On Mon, Jan 12, 2015 at 5:59 PM, Ryosuke Niwa rn...@apple.com wrote: On Jan 12, 2015, at 5:41 PM, Tab Atkins Jr. jackalm...@gmail.com wrote: [ryosuke, your mail client keeps producing flattened replies. maybe send as plain-text, not HTML?] Weird. I'm not seeing that at all on my end. It's

Re: Custom element design with ES6 classes and Element constructors

On Mon, Jan 12, 2015 at 5:16 AM, Anne van Kesteren ann...@annevk.nl wrote: On Sun, Jan 11, 2015 at 9:13 PM, Domenic Denicola d...@domenic.me wrote: However, I don't understand how to make it work for upgraded elements at all Yes, upgrading is the problem. There's two strategies as far as I can

Re: Shadow tree style isolation primitive

On Wed, Feb 4, 2015 at 11:36 PM, Olli Pettay o...@pettay.fi wrote: Why should even !important work if the component wants to use its own colors? Because that's how !important usually works. If the author has progressed to the point of doing !important, we should assume that they know what

Re: Are web components *seriously* not namespaced?

On Fri, Feb 6, 2015 at 12:48 AM, Glen glen...@gmail.com wrote: So in other words it *is* a case of it's good enough. Web components are quite possibly the future of the web, and yet we're implementing them to be good enough in 90% of use cases? jQuery is JavaScript which means that it's

Re: Standardising canvas-driven background images

On Fri, Feb 20, 2015 at 1:50 PM, Matthew Robb matthewwr...@gmail.com wrote: On Fri, Feb 20, 2015 at 2:25 PM, Tab Atkins Jr. jackalm...@gmail.com wrote: Images level 4 If/when that spec reappears it would be great if you could reply to this thread with a link or something... Thanks! Here we

Re: template namespace attribute proposal

[Sorry for the reply-chain breaking; Gmail is being super weird about your message in particular, and won't let me reply directly to it. Some bug.] Karl Dubost said: The intersection seems to be: ['a', 'style', 'script', 'track', 'title', 'canvas', 'source', 'video', 'iframe', 'audio',

Re: template namespace attribute proposal

On Fri, Mar 13, 2015 at 2:09 PM, Jonas Sicking jo...@sicking.cc wrote: Unless the SVG WG is willing to drop support for script![CDATA[...]]/script. But that seems like it'd break a lot of content. Like, on the same line? Because I recall that sort of thing showing up in old HTML tutorials,

Re: template namespace attribute proposal

On Thu, Mar 12, 2015 at 3:07 AM, Anne van Kesteren ann...@annevk.nl wrote: On Thu, Mar 12, 2015 at 4:32 AM, Benjamin Lesh bl...@netflix.com wrote: What are your thoughts on this idea? I think it would be more natural (HTML-parser-wise) if we special-cased SVG elements, similar to how e.g.

Re: template namespace attribute proposal

On Fri, Mar 13, 2015 at 1:27 PM, Benjamin Lesh bl...@netflix.com wrote: I agree completely, Tab, but it's actually too late to stop forcing authors to think about namespaces, the fact I currently have to think about it is the source of this suggestion. You have to think about it today *because

Re: template namespace attribute proposal

On Fri, Mar 13, 2015 at 1:48 PM, Jonas Sicking jo...@sicking.cc wrote: On Fri, Mar 13, 2015 at 1:16 PM, Tab Atkins Jr. jackalm...@gmail.com wrote: On Thu, Mar 12, 2015 at 3:07 AM, Anne van Kesteren ann...@annevk.nl wrote: On Thu, Mar 12, 2015 at 4:32 AM, Benjamin Lesh bl...@netflix.com wrote

Re: Standardising canvas-driven background images

On Fri, Feb 20, 2015 at 7:51 AM, Ashley Gullen ash...@scirra.com wrote: Forgive me if I've missed past discussion on this feature but I need it so I'm wondering what the status of it is. (Ref: https://www.webkit.org/blog/176/css-canvas-drawing/ and

Re: template namespace attribute proposal

On Wed, Mar 18, 2015 at 2:06 PM, Ryosuke Niwa rn...@apple.com wrote: On Mar 16, 2015, at 3:14 PM, Tab Atkins Jr. jackalm...@gmail.com wrote: Karl Dubost said: The intersection seems to be: ['a', 'style', 'script', 'track', 'title', 'canvas', 'source', 'video', 'iframe', 'audio', 'font

Re: [Selection] Support of Multiple Selection (was: Should selection.getRangeAt return a clone or a reference?)

On Tue, Jan 13, 2015 at 2:05 PM, Mats Palmgren m...@mozilla.com wrote: On 01/12/2015 07:59 PM, Ben Peters wrote: Multiple selection is an important feature in the future. Indeed, there are many important use cases for it. Here are some use cases that are implemented using multi-range

Re: Proposal for changes to manage Shadow DOM content distribution

This is literally reinventing Selectors at this point. The solution to we don't think it's worth implementing *all* of Selectors is to define a subset of supported Selectors, not to define a brand new mechanism that's equivalent to selectors but with a new syntax. On Wed, Apr 22, 2015 at 10:21

Re: Proposal for changes to manage Shadow DOM content distribution

On Wed, Apr 22, 2015 at 2:29 PM, Ryosuke Niwa rn...@apple.com wrote: On Apr 22, 2015, at 8:52 AM, Domenic Denicola d...@domenic.me wrote: Between content-slot-specified slots, attribute-specified slots, element-named slots, and everything-else-slots, we're now in a weird place where we've

Re: Proposal for changes to manage Shadow DOM content distribution

On Wed, Apr 22, 2015 at 2:53 PM, Ryosuke Niwa rn...@apple.com wrote: On Apr 22, 2015, at 2:38 PM, Tab Atkins Jr. jackalm...@gmail.com wrote: On Wed, Apr 22, 2015 at 2:29 PM, Ryosuke Niwa rn...@apple.com wrote: On Apr 22, 2015, at 8:52 AM, Domenic Denicola d...@domenic.me wrote: Between content

Re: Proposal for changes to manage Shadow DOM content distribution

On Wed, Apr 22, 2015 at 4:40 PM, Jan Miksovsky jan@component.kitchen wrote: Hi Tab, Thanks for your feedback! A primary motivation for proposing names instead of CSS selectors to control distribution is to enable subclassing. We think it’s important for a subclass to be able to override a

Re: Proposal for changes to manage Shadow DOM content distribution

On Wed, Apr 22, 2015 at 5:04 PM, Ryosuke Niwa rn...@apple.com wrote: I find it decidedly relevant given I'm pointing out that attribute-specified slots Domenic mentioned isn't what you described. Since the only venue in which attribute-specified slots came up are [1], [2], and [3]. We're

Re: Directory Upload Proposal

On Tue, Apr 28, 2015 at 3:53 PM, Ryan Seddon seddon.r...@gmail.com wrote: To enable developers to build future interoperable solutions, we've drafted a proposal [4], with the helpful feedback of Mozilla and Google, that focuses strictly on providing the mechanisms necessary to enable directory

Re: =[xhr]

On Tue, Apr 28, 2015 at 7:51 AM, Ken Nelson k...@pure3interactive.com wrote: RE async: false being deprecated There's still occasionally a need for a call from client javascript back to server and wait on results. Example: an inline call from client javascript to PHP on server to authenticate

Re: :host pseudo-class

On Sat, Apr 25, 2015 at 9:32 AM, Anne van Kesteren ann...@annevk.nl wrote: I don't understand why :host is a pseudo-class rather than a pseudo-element. My mental model of a pseudo-class is that it allows you to match an element based on a boolean internal slot of that element. :host is not

Re: Imperative API for Node Distribution in Shadow DOM (Revisited)

On Mon, Apr 27, 2015 at 4:06 PM, Tab Atkins Jr. jackalm...@gmail.com wrote: On Mon, Apr 27, 2015 at 3:42 PM, Ryosuke Niwa rn...@apple.com wrote: On Apr 27, 2015, at 3:15 PM, Steve Orvell sorv...@google.com wrote: IMO, the appeal of this proposal is that it's a small change to the current spec

Re: Imperative API for Node Distribution in Shadow DOM (Revisited)

On Mon, Apr 27, 2015 at 3:42 PM, Ryosuke Niwa rn...@apple.com wrote: On Apr 27, 2015, at 3:15 PM, Steve Orvell sorv...@google.com wrote: IMO, the appeal of this proposal is that it's a small change to the current spec and avoids changing user expectations about the state of the dom and can

Re: :host pseudo-class

On Thu, Apr 30, 2015 at 2:27 AM, Anne van Kesteren ann...@annevk.nl wrote: On Mon, Apr 27, 2015 at 11:14 PM, Tab Atkins Jr. jackalm...@gmail.com wrote: Pseudo-elements are things that aren't DOM elements, but are created by Selectors for the purpose of CSS to act like elements. That's

Re: Imperative API for Node Distribution in Shadow DOM (Revisited)

On Wed, Apr 29, 2015 at 4:15 PM, Dimitri Glazkov dglaz...@google.com wrote: On Mon, Apr 27, 2015 at 8:48 PM, Ryosuke Niwa rn...@apple.com wrote: One thing that worries me about the `distribute` callback approach (a.k.a. Anne's approach) is that it bakes distribution algorithm into the platform

Re: Imperative API for Node Distribution in Shadow DOM (Revisited)

On Wed, Apr 29, 2015 at 4:47 PM, Ryosuke Niwa rn...@apple.com wrote: On Apr 29, 2015, at 4:37 PM, Tab Atkins Jr. jackalm...@gmail.com wrote: On Wed, Apr 29, 2015 at 4:15 PM, Dimitri Glazkov dglaz...@google.com wrote: On Mon, Apr 27, 2015 at 8:48 PM, Ryosuke Niwa rn...@apple.com wrote: One

Re: :host pseudo-class

On Tue, May 5, 2015 at 10:56 PM, Anne van Kesteren ann...@annevk.nl wrote: On Tue, May 5, 2015 at 8:39 PM, Tab Atkins Jr. jackalm...@gmail.com wrote: It's certainly no weirder, imo, than having a pseudo-element that doesn't actually live in any element's pseudo-tree, but instead just lives

Re: :host pseudo-class

On Thu, Apr 30, 2015 at 10:51 PM, Anne van Kesteren ann...@annevk.nl wrote: On Fri, May 1, 2015 at 7:39 AM, Elliott Sprehn espr...@chromium.org wrote: That's still true if you use ::host, what is the thing on the left hand side the ::host lives on? I'm not aware of any pseudo element that's not

Re: :host pseudo-class

On Mon, May 4, 2015 at 9:38 PM, Anne van Kesteren ann...@annevk.nl wrote: On Tue, May 5, 2015 at 2:08 AM, Tab Atkins Jr. jackalm...@gmail.com wrote: On Thu, Apr 30, 2015 at 10:51 PM, Anne van Kesteren ann...@annevk.nl wrote: But maybe you're right and the whole pseudo-class/pseudo-element

Re: :host pseudo-class

On Mon, May 4, 2015 at 9:52 PM, Jonas Sicking jo...@sicking.cc wrote: On Sun, Apr 26, 2015 at 8:37 PM, L. David Baron dba...@dbaron.org wrote: On Saturday 2015-04-25 09:32 -0700, Anne van Kesteren wrote: I don't understand why :host is a pseudo-class rather than a pseudo-element. My mental

Re: Imperative API for Node Distribution in Shadow DOM (Revisited)

On Tue, May 5, 2015 at 11:20 AM, Ryosuke Niwa rn...@apple.com wrote: On May 4, 2015, at 10:20 PM, Anne van Kesteren ann...@annevk.nl wrote: On Tue, May 5, 2015 at 6:58 AM, Elliott Sprehn espr...@chromium.org wrote: We can solve this problem by running the distribution code in a separate

Re: PSA: publishing new WD of File API on April 21

On Wed, Apr 15, 2015 at 7:23 AM, Arthur Barstow art.bars...@gmail.com wrote: * This spec is now using Github https://w3c.github.io/FileAPI/ and the ED is https://w3c.github.io/FileAPI/Overview.html. PRs are welcome and encouraged. (I think it would be useful if this spec used ReSpec and if

Re: PSA: publishing new WD of File API on April 21

On Wed, Apr 15, 2015 at 7:23 AM, Arthur Barstow art.bars...@gmail.com wrote: Hi All, A new Working Draft publication of File API is planned for April 21 using the following version as the basis: https://w3c.github.io/FileAPI/TR.html Note that this version appears to be based off the

Re: PSA: publishing new WD of File API on April 21

On Wed, Apr 15, 2015 at 3:00 PM, Arthur Barstow art.bars...@gmail.com wrote: On 4/15/15 5:56 PM, Tab Atkins Jr. wrote: On Wed, Apr 15, 2015 at 7:23 AM, Arthur Barstow art.bars...@gmail.com wrote: https://w3c.github.io/FileAPI/TR.html Note that this version appears to be based off

Re: PSA: publishing new WD of File API on April 21

On Wed, Apr 15, 2015 at 12:54 PM, Martin Thomson martin.thom...@gmail.com wrote: On 15 April 2015 at 07:26, Arthur Barstow art.bars...@gmail.com wrote: * This spec is now using Github https://w3c.github.io/FileAPI/ That repo is actually https://github.com/w3c/FileAPI/. Since the most

Re: Writing spec algorithms in ES6?

On Thu, Jun 11, 2015 at 1:41 PM, Boris Zbarsky bzbar...@mit.edu wrote: On 6/11/15 4:32 PM, Dimitri Glazkov wrote: I noticed that the CSS Color Module Level 4 actually does this, and it seems pretty nice: http://dev.w3.org/csswg/css-color/#dom-rgbcolor-rgbcolorcolor I should note that the ES

Re: Shadow DOM spec bugs will be migrated into GitHub issues

Note for the future (to you and editors of other specs in WebApps): Before doing this kind of mass bug editting, please turn off the automatic email to public-webapps. If you can't do that yourself, Mike Smith can (at least, he's done it in the past). That prevents the mass flood of bugspam

Re: [shadow-dom] ::before/after on shadow hosts

All right, sounds pretty unanimous that #2 (current behavior) is what we should go with. I'll clarify the Scoping spec. Thanks! ~TJ

[shadow-dom] ::before/after on shadow hosts

I was recently pointed to this StackOverflow thread http://stackoverflow.com/questions/31094454/does-the-shadow-dom-replace-before-and-after/ which asks what happens to ::before and ::after on shadow hosts, as it's not clear from the specs. I had to admit that I hadn't thought of this

Re: PSA: publish WD of WebIDL Level 1

On Thu, Jul 30, 2015 at 7:29 AM, Arthur Barstow art.bars...@gmail.com wrote: Hi All, This is heads-up re the intent to publish a Working Draft of WebIDL Level 1 (on or around August 4) using Yves' document as the basis and a new shortname of WebIDL-1:

Re: PSA: publish WD of WebIDL Level 1

On Fri, Aug 7, 2015 at 9:23 AM, Travis Leithead travis.leith...@microsoft.com wrote: This is, at a minimum, incremental goodness. It's better than leaving the prior L1 published document around--which already tripped up a few folks on my team recently. I strongly +1 it. There are

Re: Call for Consensus: Publish First Public Working Draft of FindText API, respond by 14 October

On Tue, Oct 6, 2015 at 3:34 PM, Doug Schepers wrote: > Hi, Eliott– > > Good question. > > I don't have a great answer yet, but this is something that will need to be > worked out with Shadow DOM, not just for this spec, but for Selection API > and others, as well as to CSS, which

Re: Normative references to Workers.

On Tue, Sep 15, 2015 at 10:31 AM, Mike West wrote: > The "Upgrade Insecure Requests" specification[1] references the WHATWG HTML > spec for the > "set up a worker environment settings object" algorithm[2], as the Web > Workers Candidate Recommendation from May 2012[3]

Re: Indexed DB + Promises

On Tue, Sep 29, 2015 at 10:51 AM, Domenic Denicola wrote: > I guess part of the question is, does this add enough value, or will authors > still prefer wrapper libraries, which can afford to throw away backward > compatibility in order to avoid these ergonomic problems? From

Re: Indexed DB + Promises

On Wed, Sep 30, 2015 at 11:07 AM, Kyle Huey <m...@kylehuey.com> wrote: > On Wed, Sep 30, 2015 at 10:50 AM, Tab Atkins Jr. <jackalm...@gmail.com> wrote: >> On Tue, Sep 29, 2015 at 10:51 AM, Domenic Denicola <d...@domenic.me> wrote: >>> I guess part of the que

Re: Shadow DOM and alternate stylesheets

On Tue, Dec 8, 2015 at 4:43 AM, Rune Lillesveen wrote: > what should happen with the title attribute of style elements in Shadow DOM? > > In Blink you can currently select style elements in shadow trees based > on the alternate stylesheet name set for the document. You even set >

Re: [XHR]

On Wed, Mar 16, 2016 at 5:10 AM, Jonathan Garbee wrote: > On Wed, Mar 16, 2016 at 7:10 AM Hallvord Reiar Michaelsen Steen > wrote: >> On Tue, Mar 15, 2016 at 11:19 PM, Gomer Thomas >> wrote: >> >> > According to IETF

Re: [custom-elements] Prefix x- for custom elements like data- attributes

On Mon, Apr 25, 2016 at 10:06 AM, Bang Seongbeom wrote: > It would be good to restrict custom element's name to start with like > 'x-' for the future standards. User-defined custom attributes; data > attributes are also restricted its name to start with 'data-' so we

Re: [Custom Elements] Not requiring hyphens in names.

On Wed, Apr 13, 2016 at 12:33 PM, /#!/JoePea wrote: > What if custom Elements simply override existing ones then? > > ```js > shadowRoot.registerElement('div', MyElement) > ``` That means we lose the lingua franca that HTML provides; two independent libraries can't ever depend

Re: [Custom Elements] Not requiring hyphens in names.

On Wed, Apr 13, 2016 at 11:12 AM, /#!/JoePea wrote: > I personally don't like this limitation. I think Custom Elements would > be better if we could create elements that have > , with the possible exception that we can't override the > native elements. This would prevent

Re: Service Worker issues

> caches.open("blog - 2016-06-10 14:14:23 -0700").then(c => c.keys()) > Promise { : "pending" } Note that this test will *not* tell you whether or not c.keys() returns a promise; the .then callback is allowed to return a non-promise, and .then() always returns a promise regardless. You have to

<    1   2   3   4   5