[webkit-dev] Implementing Shadow DOM spec in WebKit
jarred at webkit.org
Thu Jan 12 07:52:45 PST 2012
Very awesome, great progress! Sencha is very interested in Web Components
and we'll be giving you feedback and contribute help in any way we can. It
(sadly) didn't make our 2012 Top 10 Wish List (I think it was a matter of
timing), but it did receive mentions.
On Wed, Jan 11, 2012 at 7:41 PM, Dimitri Glazkov <dglazkov at chromium.org>wrote:
> On Wed, Jan 11, 2012 at 3:56 PM, Maciej Stachowiak <mjs at apple.com> 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
> It explains how four pieces fit together to produce Web Components. In
> short, the custom elements and decorators rely on templates and shadow
> > 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
> >> (
> >> 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:
> >> 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
> >> webkit-dev at lists.webkit.org
> >> http://lists.webkit.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/webkit-dev
> webkit-dev mailing list
> webkit-dev at lists.webkit.org
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the webkit-dev