Re: Proposal for changes to manage Shadow DOM content distribution

> On Apr 24, 2015, at 2:23 PM, Tab Atkins Jr. wrote: > > On Wed, Apr 22, 2015 at 5:04 PM, Ryosuke Niwa 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-specifie

Re: Proposal for changes to manage Shadow DOM content distribution

On Wed, Apr 22, 2015 at 5:04 PM, Ryosuke Niwa 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 > DEFINITELY NOT

Re: Proposal for changes to manage Shadow DOM content distribution

On Wed, Apr 22, 2015 at 4:40 PM, Jan Miksovsky 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 base class inser

Re: Proposal for changes to manage Shadow DOM content distribution

> On Apr 22, 2015, at 3:48 PM, Justin Fagnani wrote: > > On Wed, Apr 22, 2015 at 2:37 PM, Ryosuke Niwa > wrote: > >> On Apr 22, 2015, at 10:16 AM, Justin Fagnani > > wrote: >> >> On Tue, Apr 21, 2015 at 10:40 PM, Ryosuke Niwa >

Re: Proposal for changes to manage Shadow DOM content distribution

On Wed, Apr 22, 2015 at 4:40 PM, Jan Miksovsky 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 base class inse

Re: Proposal for changes to manage Shadow DOM content distribution

> On Apr 22, 2015, at 3:54 PM, Tab Atkins Jr. wrote: > > On Wed, Apr 22, 2015 at 2:53 PM, Ryosuke Niwa wrote: >> On Apr 22, 2015, at 2:38 PM, Tab Atkins Jr. wrote: >>> On Wed, Apr 22, 2015 at 2:29 PM, Ryosuke Niwa wrote: On Apr 22, 2015, at 8:52 AM, Domenic Denicola wrote: > Between

Re: Proposal for changes to manage Shadow DOM content distribution

Ugh, hit send too fast. In the university site example below, the instance should have been written: Faculty –Jan > On Apr 22, 2015, at 4:40 PM, Jan Miksovsky wrote: > > Hi Tab, > > Thanks for your feedback! > > A primary motivation for proposing names instead of CSS selectors to contro

Re: Proposal for changes to manage Shadow DOM content distribution

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 base class insertion point. That seems easier to achieve with a name. It lets co

RE: Proposal for changes to manage Shadow DOM content distribution

the details... From: Ryosuke Niwa [mailto:rn...@apple.com] Sent: Wednesday, April 22, 2015 2:37 PM To: Justin Fagnani Cc: Daniel Freedman; WebApps WG; Edward O'Connor; Jan Miksovsky Subject: Re: Proposal for changes to manage Shadow DOM content distribution On Apr 22, 2015, at 10:16 AM, Justin F

Re: Proposal for changes to manage Shadow DOM content distribution

On 04/22/2015 03:54 PM, Tab Atkins Jr. wrote: On Wed, Apr 22, 2015 at 2:53 PM, Ryosuke Niwa wrote: On Apr 22, 2015, at 2:38 PM, Tab Atkins Jr. wrote: On Wed, Apr 22, 2015 at 2:29 PM, Ryosuke Niwa wrote: On Apr 22, 2015, at 8:52 AM, Domenic Denicola wrote: Between content-slot-specified sl

Re: Proposal for changes to manage Shadow DOM content distribution

For the comparison, I've re-written the examples by using " as function" syntax. https://gist.github.com/hayatoito/f2df8e10cb8cc551f80c Can I assume that both have the same power, fundamentally? (Please ignore that power of the CSS selector here ;) If both approaches have the (almost) equivalent

Re: Proposal for changes to manage Shadow DOM content distribution

FWIW, I can see the appeal of a slot-based approach in Ryosuke/Ted/Jan proposal. It reduces the implementation complexity: all of the selector-checking logic in http://w3c.github.io/webcomponents/spec/shadow/#satisfying-matching-criteria is replaced with (what effectively is) a map lookup. While

Re: Proposal for changes to manage Shadow DOM content distribution

On Wed, Apr 22, 2015 at 2:53 PM, Ryosuke Niwa wrote: > On Apr 22, 2015, at 2:38 PM, Tab Atkins Jr. wrote: >> On Wed, Apr 22, 2015 at 2:29 PM, Ryosuke Niwa wrote: >>> On Apr 22, 2015, at 8:52 AM, Domenic Denicola wrote: Between content-slot-specified slots, attribute-specified slots, e

Re: Proposal for changes to manage Shadow DOM content distribution

On Wed, Apr 22, 2015 at 2:37 PM, Ryosuke Niwa wrote: > > On Apr 22, 2015, at 10:16 AM, Justin Fagnani > wrote: > > > > On Tue, Apr 21, 2015 at 10:40 PM, Ryosuke Niwa wrote: > >> >> > On Apr 21, 2015, at 10:23 PM, Justin Fagnani >> wrote: >> > >> > I do want the ability to redirect distributed

Re: Proposal for changes to manage Shadow DOM content distribution

> On Apr 22, 2015, at 2:38 PM, Tab Atkins Jr. wrote: > > On Wed, Apr 22, 2015 at 2:29 PM, Ryosuke Niwa wrote: >>> On Apr 22, 2015, at 8:52 AM, Domenic Denicola wrote: >>> Between content-slot-specified slots, attribute-specified slots, >>> element-named slots, and everything-else-slots, we're

Re: Proposal for changes to manage Shadow DOM content distribution

On Wed, Apr 22, 2015 at 2:29 PM, Ryosuke Niwa wrote: >> On Apr 22, 2015, at 8:52 AM, Domenic Denicola 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 reinvented a micro-langua

Re: Proposal for changes to manage Shadow DOM content distribution

> On Apr 22, 2015, at 10:16 AM, Justin Fagnani wrote: > > > > On Tue, Apr 21, 2015 at 10:40 PM, Ryosuke Niwa > wrote: > > > On Apr 21, 2015, at 10:23 PM, Justin Fagnani > > wrote: > > > > I do want the ability to redirect distributed

Re: Proposal for changes to manage Shadow DOM content distribution

I don't think defining a slot based on an attribute value is something we'd like to support. > On Apr 22, 2015, at 10:21 AM, Justin Fagnani wrote: > > Another technique I've seen used is compound selectors, which could be used > to migrate from one selector to another while preserving backward

Re: Proposal for changes to manage Shadow DOM content distribution

> On Apr 22, 2015, at 8:52 AM, Domenic Denicola 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 reinvented a micro-language with some, but not all, of the power > of CSS sele

Re: Proposal for changes to manage Shadow DOM content distribution

FWIW, we're working to implement what we call named blocks in Ember.js and believe this proposal aligns very closely to what our users have been asking us to build for them. - Erik On Wednesday, April 22, 2015, Tab Atkins Jr. wrote: > This is literally reinventing Selectors at this point. The

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

Another technique I've seen used is compound selectors, which could be used to migrate from one selector to another while preserving backwards compatibility, or to provide some nice default distributions that are also accessible via a class or attribute (ie, select="header, .header"). Could slots

Re: Proposal for changes to manage Shadow DOM content distribution

On Tue, Apr 21, 2015 at 10:40 PM, Ryosuke Niwa wrote: > > > On Apr 21, 2015, at 10:23 PM, Justin Fagnani > wrote: > > > > I do want the ability to redirect distributed nodes into a holes in the > base template, so that part is welcome to me. However, my first reaction to > the slot idea is that

RE: Proposal for changes to manage Shadow DOM content distribution

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 reinvented a micro-language with some, but not all, of the power of CSS selectors. Is adding a new micro-language to the web platform worth help

Re: Proposal for changes to manage Shadow DOM content distribution

On Apr 21, 2015 10:29 PM, "Ryosuke Niwa" wrote: > > >> On Apr 21, 2015, at 10:17 PM, Brian Kardell wrote: >> >> On Apr 21, 2015 8:22 PM, "Ryosuke Niwa" wrote: >> > >> > Hi all, >> > >> > Following WebApps discussion last year [1] and earlier this year [2] about template transclusions and inherit

Re: Proposal for changes to manage Shadow DOM content distribution

> On Apr 21, 2015, at 11:08 PM, Domenic Denicola wrote: > > From: Ryosuke Niwa [mailto:rn...@apple.com] > >> At the conceptual level, they're equivalent. However, we didn't find the >> extra flexibility of using CSS selectors compelling as we mentioned in our >> proposal [1]. > > is such

Re: Proposal for changes to manage Shadow DOM content distribution

> On Apr 21, 2015, at 10:23 PM, Justin Fagnani wrote: > > I do want the ability to redirect distributed nodes into a holes in the base > template, so that part is welcome to me. However, my first reaction to the > slot idea is that forcing users to add the content-slot attribute on children >

Re: Proposal for changes to manage Shadow DOM content distribution

> On Apr 21, 2015, at 10:17 PM, Brian Kardell wrote: > On Apr 21, 2015 8:22 PM, "Ryosuke Niwa" > wrote: > > > > Hi all, > > > > Following WebApps discussion last year [1] and earlier this year [2] about > > template transclusions and inheritance in shadow DOM, Jan Miksov

Re: Proposal for changes to manage Shadow DOM content distribution

I do want the ability to redirect distributed nodes into a holes in the base template, so that part is welcome to me. However, my first reaction to the slot idea is that forcing users to add the content-slot attribute on children significantly impairs the DOM API surface area of custom elements. F

Re: Proposal for changes to manage Shadow DOM content distribution

On Apr 21, 2015 8:22 PM, "Ryosuke Niwa" wrote: > > Hi all, > > Following WebApps discussion last year [1] and earlier this year [2] about template transclusions and inheritance in shadow DOM, Jan Miksovsky at Component Kitchen, Ted O'Connor and I (Ryosuke Niwa) at Apple had a meeting where we came

Re: Proposal for changes to manage Shadow DOM content distribution

> On Apr 21, 2015, at 9:43 PM, Daniel Freedman wrote: > > Hi Ryosuke, > > I want to start by thanking you, Ted, and Jan for taking the time to make > this proposal. > > I read through the proposal, and had a quick question about how > redistribution should work with this slot concept. > I cr

Re: Proposal for changes to manage Shadow DOM content distribution

On Tue, Apr 21, 2015 at 9:43 PM, Daniel Freedman wrote: > Hi Ryosuke, > > I want to start by thanking you, Ted, and Jan for taking the time to make > this proposal. > > I read through the proposal, and had a quick question about how > redistribution should work with this slot concept. > I created

Re: Proposal for changes to manage Shadow DOM content distribution

Hi Ryosuke, I want to start by thanking you, Ted, and Jan for taking the time to make this proposal. I read through the proposal, and had a quick question about how redistribution should work with this slot concept. I created a quick example that would take two date inputs (start date and end da