Meeting minutes
Howdy IRC! Is Keith in the room that coudl help make sure Zoom in connected?
Joey: Scoped Custom Element Registries still have a couple of open issues
Ryosuke: main hold back are minor details on what happens with same name in two registries and then move between trees.
<bennyp> Slot content question: would this strip whitespace by default?
<bennyp> <x-l> </xl> <- has whitespace (therefore has slotted content?) <x-l></x-l> <- no content at all
<bennyp> this gotcha can affect authors who use html formatting tools
<JustinFagnani> w3c/
<JustinFagnani> wicg/webcomponents issue for detecting filled slots: WICG/
Ryosuke: raise /thing/ combinator at the CSS WG as a real thing or not.
ryosuke: maybe we need this as a pseudo class
justin: walks through the JS path the allows for content detection, requiring double render and blocks SSR
ryosuke: w3c/
justin: separating has from desendents is likely a smaller conversation
ryosuke: agrees
ryosuke: is CSSWG is at TPAC then we should try and get this into the convo there
<JaredW_> Declarative Custom Elements ?
Justin: what DCE means could be unclear
Justin: CG could support community out reach to clarify what that means.
Justin: thinks there is interest
Justin: doesn't get to the reports because of "broken things", but collaborative interest is great to hear
ryosuke: gathering use cases is a good next step
ryosuke: XBL was some version of this, as CSS essentially declared a shadow root onto something
ryosuke: Mozilla should have some feedback on the experience of shipping (and unshipping ) XBL
ryosuke: buggest win may be the platform performance wins that a browser could bring
*biggest
Justin: long road to DCE starts with DOM parts
Ryosuke: DCE includes some level of replacing something in your tree
Ryosuke: DCE could take progress even without templating
<JustinFagnani> WICG/
Justin: "non-linear" progress in this area could confuse consumers, but could be marketed correctly
Justin: looking for clarity on whether DCEv1 actually needs templating.
Ryosuke: happy to meet virtual, but feels that a process (like what's in CSSWG) is what's missing.
Ryosuke: discussion happens but conclusions are not made due to _something_...
Joey: OpenUI does this by having "resolutions" and blog posts after weekly meetings
Justin: is there a WG that we work under? or can we just make proposals to the DOM specs?
Would be good to see these things as a consumer of the CSSWG.
<JaredW_> Maybe part of this is having a clearer process of (a) is there a proposal(s) for [X] spec, and (b) what is the current status? Can the CG surface those more regularly?
James: the level is less important than the tight agreement of an implementor
Justin: do we need a WG or a process?
To group: Any one against a quarterly face to face?
Ryosuke: everyone agrees we can!
Ryosuke: do we want more structure?
Ryosuke: _probably_
Ryosuke: include resolutions in those meetings.