Hi Dmitri! I remember last time this came up, there was some controversy, both within the WebKit community and among browser implementors more broadly. Kudos for writing a much more comprehensive spec and taking more of the feedback into account. For example, I am delighted to see that there is no direct poking at the shadow tree in this version. This is great progress.
There are two things I'd like to know about before wholeheartedly voicing my support for an implementation effort: 1) You mentioned that Mozilla and Microsoft are participating. I was unable to find on-the-record comments from either Mozilla or Microsoft in response to your latest spec draft on either public-webapps or in the bugzilla bugs cited. If I overlooked it, I'd appreciate a pointer, otherwise, it would be great if we could get some sort of remarks from them on the public record. I want to make sure that at least the general direction we go in is one that other vendors support. 2) I recall that in past discussions, a key issue was the desire from many to see a declarative syntax in order to fully evaluate the proposal (as opposed to assuming it could be added later as a layer on top). I was unable to find this in the spec proposal. If I missed it, can you point me to where it is? Or was it decided at some point that this isn't actually necessary to evaluate the proposal? Thanks, Maciej On Jan 11, 2012, at 3:33 PM, Dimitri Glazkov wrote: > Hi WebKit! > > I wanted to let you know that we are planning to implement the Shadow > DOM specification > (http://dvcs.w3.org/hg/webcomponents/raw-file/tip/spec/shadow/index.html) > in WebKit. For now, its public-facing APIs will hide behind > ENABLE(SHADOW_DOM) flag and help gather implementer and developer > feedback. > > Shadow DOM spec is part of the Web Components effort (see overview > here: http://dvcs.w3.org/hg/webcomponents/raw-file/tip/explainer/index.html), > and is on the standards track in the WebApps WG. Work is ongoing > (https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/showdependencytree.cgi?id=14972), with > participation from Microsoft and Mozilla. Adobe also expressed > interest in contributing. > > In addition, Shadow DOM is being considered as the replacement of > similar plumbing in SVG for SVG v.Next. This particular effort is just > starting in SVG WG. > > The meta bug to follow is https://bugs.webkit.org/show_bug.cgi?id=63606. > > :DG< > _______________________________________________ > webkit-dev mailing list > [email protected] > http://lists.webkit.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/webkit-dev _______________________________________________ webkit-dev mailing list [email protected] http://lists.webkit.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/webkit-dev
