On Wed, Jan 11, 2012 at 3:56 PM, Maciej Stachowiak <[email protected]> wrote: > > 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.
Microsoft went on record to voice their support at TPAC (http://www.w3.org/2011/11/01-webapps-minutes.html, look for "Travis, Microsoft"), and we're working with them on a detailed spec review. I have been working with Jonas Sicking F2F and integrating his feedback (http://goo.gl/LAfpt). For example, I am meeting with him and a few XBL/XUL folks tomorrow. We'll discuss Web Components in the context of migration from XBL and file spec bugs. > > 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? The document you're looking for is http://dvcs.w3.org/hg/webcomponents/raw-file/tip/explainer/index.html. It explains how four pieces fit together to produce Web Components. In short, the custom elements and decorators rely on templates and shadow DOM. :DG< > > 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
