4 ms·
> We've been working on Shadow DOM in the open for 2 years There are references in the thread to a f2f that happened a week ago, but this implementation has be
by rch 13y ago
> We've been working on Shadow DOM in the open for 2 years
There are references in the thread to a f2f that happened a week ago, but this implementation has been evolving for a Long time now. The most vocal respondents only seem to be concerned about the phrasing, and haven't indicated publicly that they have anything technically substantive to add to the discussion anyway.
- bzbarsky 13y agoThe technically substantive stuff is all in existing spec issues. http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-style/2014Feb/0152.html http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-style/2014Feb/0152.h... has some links if you care.
- jontro 13y agoWhich is replied to here: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-style/2014Feb/0158.html http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-style/2014Feb/0158.h... Personally the only thing that I think was done incorrectly here was the wording of the initial e-mail. The web needs to move forward
- rch 13y agoAgreed - there was even a terminology explanation and apology message in there too. The first couple of messages from the original post on seem a little hyperbolic, but the fire sort of put itself out in short order.
- bzbarsky 13y agoThere are some fundamental disagreements here about whether certain cases are "edge cases", if you keep reading the threads.
- rch 13y agoThanks - I did continue to read and looked into the spec bugs. I guess I didn't consider Boris, Dimitri, or Tab as being all that outspoken about the so called 'freeze' - one acknowledged the poor word choice, but that's about it.