> From: Travis Leithead [mailto:travis.leith...@microsoft.com]
> Sent: 24 October 2015 04:42
> Well, since SVG 'use' is mostly about replicating the composed tree
anyway,
> it seems that is should probably render the composed tree--e.g., this
seems
> natural, because use would "replicate" the host
his would look
like for Elements with an attached shadow.
I'd love to know what the folks on www-...@w3.org working on SVG2 think about
this.
-Original Message-
From: rn...@apple.com [mailto:rn...@apple.com]
Sent: Thursday, October 22, 2015 6:16 PM
To: public-webapps@w3.org
Subject: Shadow DOM
On Fri, Oct 23, 2015 at 12:42 PM, Travis Leithead <
travis.leith...@microsoft.com> wrote:
> Well, since SVG 'use' is mostly about replicating the composed tree
> anyway, it seems that is should probably render the composed tree--e.g.,
> this seems natural, because use would "replicate" the host
Hi all,
What should happen when a SVG use element references an element (or its
ancestor) with a shadow root?
Should the use element show the composed tree underneath it or ignore shadow
DOM altogether?
I'm a little inclined towards the former (uses the composed tree).
- R. Niwa
