I appreciate the passion, but that's a pretty bad definition. I've actually heard a similar one by browser vendors as they point to the fact that webdevs can do it but those solutions at times have unfortunate end user implications (not saying that is true for SD specifically)...
BTW, I want to explicitly state that we could *absolutely* have missed something. We whiteboarded and prototyped dozens of alternatives over hundreds of hours, but obviously not perfect. If you *can* come up with something that integrates better, let's talk!
-
-
You're telling me that, hypothetically, something like <div scope="foo"> 'shadow' DOM <div scope="bar">'light' DOM</div> </div> could never be treated the same way by the browser as this? <my-foo> <my-bar>light DOM</my-bar> </my-foo>
-
We built (and shipped, and then unshipped) `<style scoped>` which was ~roughly this: https://developers.google.com/web/updates/2012/03/A-New-Experimental-Feature-style-scoped …
@tabatkins will likely remember more about why we abandoned, but perf impact was unacceptable IIRC. - 6 more replies
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.
& Web Standards TL; Blink API OWNER
Named PWAs w/
DMs open. Tweets my own; press@google.com for official comms.