Re: Shadow DOM spec for v1 is ready to be reviewed

2015-09-09 Thread Anne van Kesteren
On Mon, Sep 7, 2015 at 9:35 AM, Hayato Ito  wrote:
> I think the spec should address these issues and define the well-defined
> behavior clearly. The current spec looks too lazy because it only mention
> the following:
>
>> Window object named properties [HTML] must access the nodes in the
>> document tree.
>
> I think this is not enough to achieve the interoperability among UAs.

Right, for many HTML features this seems problematic. Are you planning
on working on this and provide patches against
https://github.com/whatwg/html? If you think this is too much work let
me know and I'll see what I can to help. I'm trying to decrease the
backlog of HTML somewhat so this is not currently a priority for me,
but it is one of the things Mozilla considers problematic with
shipping Shadow DOM at this point.


>> Then there's the matter of text selection which we're not sure about
>> what to do. Have you folks worked on that?
>
> I've discussed this topic several times in Google, however, this is still an
> unsolved problem.
> We don't have anything which we can upstream to the spec yet.
> In Blink, we've supported only "Copy" for a selection which spans shadow
> boundaries.
> Any ideas are highly welcome.

Given that https://w3c.github.io/selection-api/ is edited by Ryosuke,
I wonder what his thoughts are. This issue must not have gotten past
the Apple team. At Mozilla we don't have a concrete proposal, it's
however something we don't think works well currently and we don't
really know how to move forward here.


-- 
https://annevankesteren.nl/



Re: Shadow DOM spec for v1 is ready to be reviewed

2015-09-07 Thread Hayato Ito
On Sun, Sep 6, 2015 at 12:53 AM Anne van Kesteren  wrote:

> On Fri, Aug 28, 2015 at 8:33 AM, Hayato Ito  wrote:
> > - Some of the remaining issues are difficult to address in the Shadow DOM
> > spec because it requires non-trivial monkey patches to DOM.  I have a
> plan
> > to upstream the Shadow DOM spec into DOM in the near future. After that,
> I
> > think we can address some of issues by updating DOM spec directly.
>
> That sounds great!
>
> It also seems there's still a number of issues around integration with
> HTML. That is, what the effect of HTML elements should be inside
> shadow trees. I seem to remember Ian having more detailed notes, but
> quickly looking around I only found:
>
> * https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=27406
> * https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=26952
> * https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=28748
>
> And these don't seem to mention the effects of various algorithms.
> E.g., named access on the global object currently finds child browsing
> contexts, but I don't think we would want it to return any that are
> inside a shadow tree. And should browsing contexts inside shadow trees
> have an effect on history?
>
>
I think the spec should address these issues and define the well-defined
behavior clearly. The current spec looks too lazy because it only mention
the following:

> Window object named properties [HTML] must access the nodes in the
document tree.

I think this is not enough to achieve the interoperability among UAs.


> Then there's the matter of text selection which we're not sure about
> what to do. Have you folks worked on that?
>
>
I've discussed this topic several times in Google, however, this is still
an unsolved problem.
We don't have anything which we can upstream to the spec yet.
In Blink, we've supported only "Copy" for a selection which spans shadow
boundaries.
Any ideas are highly welcome.


>
> --
> https://annevankesteren.nl/
>


Re: Shadow DOM spec for v1 is ready to be reviewed

2015-09-05 Thread Anne van Kesteren
On Fri, Aug 28, 2015 at 8:33 AM, Hayato Ito  wrote:
> - Some of the remaining issues are difficult to address in the Shadow DOM
> spec because it requires non-trivial monkey patches to DOM.  I have a plan
> to upstream the Shadow DOM spec into DOM in the near future. After that, I
> think we can address some of issues by updating DOM spec directly.

That sounds great!

It also seems there's still a number of issues around integration with
HTML. That is, what the effect of HTML elements should be inside
shadow trees. I seem to remember Ian having more detailed notes, but
quickly looking around I only found:

* https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=27406
* https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=26952
* https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=28748

And these don't seem to mention the effects of various algorithms.
E.g., named access on the global object currently finds child browsing
contexts, but I don't think we would want it to return any that are
inside a shadow tree. And should browsing contexts inside shadow trees
have an effect on history?


Then there's the matter of text selection which we're not sure about
what to do. Have you folks worked on that?


-- 
https://annevankesteren.nl/



Re: Shadow DOM spec for v1 is ready to be reviewed

2015-09-01 Thread Hayato Ito
Thank you for the feedback! Let me take a look at the filed issues. I
really appreciate it.
It looks  https://github.com/w3c/webcomponents/issues/308 is the only
conceptual problem. I think I can send "Intent to Implement: Shadow DOM v1"
in Blink soon. :)

On Wed, Sep 2, 2015 at 5:43 AM Ryosuke Niwa  wrote:

> Thanks for the update!
>
> On Aug 27, 2015, at 11:33 PM, Hayato Ito  wrote:
>
> Let me post a quick update for the Shadow DOM spec:
> https://w3c.github.io/webcomponents/spec/shadow/
> 
>
> I've almost done the spec work for Shadow DOM v1. I think it's time to be
> reviewed and get feedback. I hope that a browser vendor, including me, can
> start to implement it based on the current spec.
>
> You might want to use https://github.com/w3c/webcomponents/issues/289
> 
> to give me feedback. Please feel free to file a new issue if preferred.
>
>
> I've filed a bunch of editorial issues.
>
> One conceptual problem I have with the current spec is how it "unwrap"
> nested slots.  I thought we had a consensus not to do this at F2F?
> https://github.com/w3c/webcomponents/issues/308 tracks this particular
> issue.
>
> - R. Niwa
>
>


Re: Shadow DOM spec for v1 is ready to be reviewed

2015-09-01 Thread Ryosuke Niwa
Thanks for the update!

> On Aug 27, 2015, at 11:33 PM, Hayato Ito  wrote:
> 
> Let me post a quick update for the Shadow DOM spec: 
> https://w3c.github.io/webcomponents/spec/shadow/ 
> 
> 
> I've almost done the spec work for Shadow DOM v1. I think it's time to be 
> reviewed and get feedback. I hope that a browser vendor, including me, can 
> start to implement it based on the current spec.
> 
> You might want to use https://github.com/w3c/webcomponents/issues/289 
> 
>  to give me feedback. Please feel free to file a new issue if preferred.

I've filed a bunch of editorial issues.

One conceptual problem I have with the current spec is how it "unwrap" nested 
slots.  I thought we had a consensus not to do this at F2F?  
https://github.com/w3c/webcomponents/issues/308 
 tracks this particular issue.

- R. Niwa