Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

[Idea] Distant ShadowDOM. #576

Closed
trusktr opened this issue Sep 27, 2016 · 4 comments
Closed

[Idea] Distant ShadowDOM. #576

trusktr opened this issue Sep 27, 2016 · 4 comments

Comments

@trusktr
Copy link
Contributor

trusktr commented Sep 27, 2016

Currently, we can only distributed elements into a shadow root that is sibling to those elements. It'd be nice to be able to distribute elements into any shadow root, perhaps using an ID.

f.e.

<div>
  <span root-host="root-containing-element" slot="some-slot"></span>
</div>
...
<div id="root-containing-element">
  #ShadowRoot
    <slot name="some-slot">
    </slot>
</div>

In that example, the span would be distributed into the shadow root of #root-containing-element.

The reason I would want this is because it solves the problems that are introduced by me having to workaround the breaking changes of the css-transforms spec introduced in Chrome 53.

@rniwa
Copy link
Collaborator

rniwa commented Sep 27, 2016

Also see #574.

@rniwa
Copy link
Collaborator

rniwa commented Sep 27, 2016

This proposal would significantly worsens the performance characteristics of our shadow DOM implementation because ordering all those slotted elements in the tree order (or maybe insertion order?) would require O(n) traversal of the entire tree.

@hayatoito
Copy link
Contributor

hayatoito commented Oct 4, 2016

Hmm. It is not clearly demonstrated what problem this idea is trying to resolve.

@trusktr
Could you elaborate? In addition to that, any new idea should work with the rest of Shadow DOM APIs. e.g. how an event path should be.

Unless there is a clear proposal, it might be difficult to discuss.

@hayatoito
Copy link
Contributor

Let me close this since it is not clearly demonstrated what problem this idea is trying to resolve.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

3 participants