The Plan for ShadowDOM

[Rob Eisenberg]

Dear Polymer/Chrome Devs,

As you know the ShadowDOM spec is undergoing some significant changes. In particular the shift from the content/select pattern to named slots. Since Chrome has already pushed to production the content/select implementation and this is baked into the ShadwoDOM Polyfill for Polymer I'd like to know what the plan is to migrate to the v1 specification. How will should existing deployed apps handle this? How should frameworks or libraries that work the the ShadowDOM handle this? If Chrome hadn't released the non-standard implementation, this would all be easy, but because a very non-spec compliant implementation is current present in Chrome, things are made more difficult for everyone. What would be your advice in these matters?

Rob

[Hayato Ito]

I've just updated the "Shadow DOM v1 in Blink" document.

You might be interested in this section:

https://github.com/w3c/webcomponents/blob/gh-pages/proposals/shadow-dom-v1-in-blink.md#unified-distribution

Disclaimer: That is a tentative plan. Please give us your feedback. I'm still wondering what is the best for our users.

Follow Polymer on Google+: plus.google.com/107187849809354688692
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Polymer" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to polymer-dev...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/polymer-dev/becf031f-5deb-4d4a-ac40-fd864a349a69%40googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.