From: Anne van Kesteren [mailto:ann...@annevk.nl]
Depending on the changes we make based on
https://github.com/w3c/webcomponents/wiki/Shadow-DOM:-Contentious-Bits
this might already be the case. Also, I believe currently the Web
Components polyfill makes some assumptions about all of Web
On Fri, Mar 20, 2015 at 10:23 PM, Travis Leithead
travis.leith...@microsoft.com wrote:
Are we OK with a non-URL-based creation model (as used today) being fairly
different from a URL-based creation model?
I think so.
[A] breaking change for existing implementations.
Depending on the
] URL-based shadows?
On Thu, Mar 19, 2015 at 12:08 AM, Travis Leithead
travis.leith...@microsoft.com wrote:
5. I like this. Though it's really only necessary for the cross-origin use
case.
I think it's worth mentioning that the existing setup further
encourages the rather dangerous practice
Ryosuke Niwa [mailto:rn...@apple.com] wrote:
Travis wrote:
2.4. I keep running into trouble when thinking about a declarative model
for web components because declarative models are based on persistent
objects in the DOM, and those persistent objects are fully mutable. In other
words, you
/2013OctDec/0418.html
From: Ryosuke Niwa [mailto:rn...@apple.com]
Sent: Wednesday, March 18, 2015 2:26 PM
To: Travis Leithead
Cc: Dimitri Glazkov (dglaz...@google.com); WebApps WG; Anne van Kesteren
(ann...@annevk.nl); Arron Eicholz
Subject: Re: [Shadow] URL-based shadows?
On Mar 12, 2015, at 5:46 PM
On Wed, Mar 18, 2015 at 2:35 PM, Travis Leithead
travis.leith...@microsoft.com wrote:
I think ‘Worker’ threw me off at first J.
My original use case was to make the current model of loading components
more “local”, as AFAIK, these components can only presently be loaded by
code you
relates to cross-origin (or not)
components.
From: Dimitri Glazkov [mailto:dglaz...@google.com]
Sent: Monday, March 16, 2015 8:07 AM
To: Anne van Kesteren
Cc: Travis Leithead; WebApps WG; Arron Eicholz; Elliott Sprehn
Subject: Re: [Shadow] URL-based shadows?
On Mon, Mar 16, 2015 at 3:55 AM, Anne
On Mar 12, 2015, at 5:46 PM, Travis Leithead travis.leith...@microsoft.com
wrote:
Has the idea of loading/parsing a Shadow DOM directly from a URL been
discussed already? (e.g., a sort-of “micro-import” or an import that parses
its document directly into the ShadowRoot container?)
On Fri, Mar 13, 2015 at 6:44 PM, Dimitri Glazkov dglaz...@google.com wrote:
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1V7ci1-lBTY6AJxgN99aCMwjZKCjKv1v3y_7WLtcgM00/edit?pli=1
That seems really cool. I'm not sure worker is the right terminology
since at the moment worker sort of implies there's no node
On Mon, Mar 16, 2015 at 3:55 AM, Anne van Kesteren ann...@annevk.nl wrote:
On Fri, Mar 13, 2015 at 6:44 PM, Dimitri Glazkov dglaz...@google.com
wrote:
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1V7ci1-lBTY6AJxgN99aCMwjZKCjKv1v3y_7WLtcgM00/edit?pli=1
That seems really cool. I'm not sure worker is
... found it:
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1V7ci1-lBTY6AJxgN99aCMwjZKCjKv1v3y_7WLtcgM00/edit?pli=1
:DG
On Thu, Mar 12, 2015 at 6:05 PM, Dimitri Glazkov dglaz...@google.com
wrote:
Yep. Elliott (cc'd) had a proposal like this a while back. It was coolly
received (can't remember the
On Fri, Mar 13, 2015 at 12:57 PM, Travis Leithead
travis.leith...@microsoft.com wrote:
Ah, thanks Dimitri.
After reading that, I'm also receiving it rather coolly. It's a very
interesting idea, but as it relates to web components, its errs strongly on
the side of isolation to the degree
.
From: Dimitri Glazkov dglaz...@google.com
Sent: Friday, March 13, 2015 10:44 AM
To: Travis Leithead
Cc: WebApps WG; Anne van Kesteren (ann...@annevk.nl); Arron Eicholz; Elliott
Sprehn
Subject: Re: [Shadow] URL-based shadows?
... found it:
https
Yep. Elliott (cc'd) had a proposal like this a while back. It was coolly
received (can't remember the details).
:DG
On Thu, Mar 12, 2015 at 5:46 PM, Travis Leithead
travis.leith...@microsoft.com wrote:
Dimitri et al.,
Has the idea of loading/parsing a Shadow DOM directly from a URL
14 matches
Mail list logo
