On Mon, Sep 26, 2011 at 12:28 AM, Anne van Kesteren <ann...@opera.com> wrote: > On Thu, 22 Sep 2011 20:30:24 +0200, Dimitri Glazkov <dglaz...@chromium.org> > wrote: >> >> Further, instead of packaging Web Components into one omnibus >> offering, we will likely end up with several free-standing specs or >> spec addendums: >> >> 1) Shadow DOM, the largest bag of with XBL2's donated organs -- >> probably its own spec; >> 2) Constructible and extensible DOM objects which should probably >> just be part of DOM Core and HTML; >> 3) Declarative syntax for gluing the first 2 parts together -- HTML >> spec seems like a good fit; and >> 4) Confinement primitives, which is platformization of the lessons >> learned from Caja (http://code.google.com/p/google-caja/), integrated >> with element registration. > > It's still not very clear to me what any of this means and how it will fit > together. Having either a specification or examples to shoot at would be > helpful. Once it is more clear what each of these parts is going to look > like, it might be easier for me to comment on how you suggest we split them.
Yessir! Working on it! :) > > >> Why split it like this? Several reasons: >> >> a) they are independently moving parts. For example, just shadow DOM, >> all by itself, is already a useful tool in the hands of Web >> developers. It's our job as spec developers to ensure that these bits >> comprise a coherent whole, but from implementation perspective, they >> don't need to block one another. > > How do you construct a shadow DOM though declaratively without a component? For consistency's sake, it seems like a pretty cool thing to do. However, the use cases we've been working with haven't shown a need for this. At this point, I've made peace with only being able to construct shadow DOM imperatively without the components. > > >> b) each belongs in the right place. For example, making DOM objects >> extensible is a concern inside of the DOM Core spec. Declarative >> syntax really needs to live in HTML. Also... >> >> c) some parts are too small to be their own spec. >> Constructible/extensible DOM objects bit does not even have an API >> surface. >> >> d) And finally, every bit has potential of solving problems that are >> more general than just about components. We shouldn't require making a >> component if all developer wants is some shadow DOM. Similarly, lack >> of needing a component shouldn't preclude the use of confinement >> primitives. >> >> Just to recap: XBL2 is dead, exploding into a pretty rainbow. I am a >> pop tart cat in front of the rainbow. > > :-) I am glad you liked it :) :DG<
