This is an archived snapshot of W3C's public bugzilla bug tracker, decommissioned in April 2019. Please see the home page for more details.

Bug 15150 - [Explainer]: Rendered markup in poem example does not have the classname
Summary: [Explainer]: Rendered markup in poem example does not have the classname
Status: RESOLVED FIXED
Alias: None
Product: WebAppsWG
Classification: Unclassified
Component: HISTORICAL - Component Model (show other bugs)
Version: unspecified
Hardware: PC All
: P2 normal
Target Milestone: ---
Assignee: Dimitri Glazkov
QA Contact: public-webapps-bugzilla
URL:
Whiteboard:
Keywords:
Depends on:
Blocks: 14949
  Show dependency tree / graph
 
Reported: 2011-12-12 19:22 UTC by Divya Manian
Modified: 2013-05-29 02:17 UTC (History)
1 user (show)

See Also:

Attachments

Description Divya Manian 2011-12-12 19:22:57 UTC 
E.g. div class="poem"

when rendered becomes

div style="font-variant: small-caps"

Is that deliberate?
Comment 1 Dimitri Glazkov 2011-12-21 20:52:12 UTC 
Good catch! http://dvcs.w3.org/hg/webcomponents/rev/06d6e47f2848
Comment 2 Dominic Cooney 2011-12-26 02:10:08 UTC 
It was deliberate. The reason is that decorators specify a rendering, not markup per-se. So I was trying to use DOM as a way to specify rendering, hence the note about "not including UA stylesheets." But maybe that is too subtle.

Maybe the example should include an image of what is produced, perhaps with rectangles highlighting which boxes are contributed by the document and which are contributed by the decorator.

I think it is good pedagogy to reinforce the notion that decorators don’t produce DOM.
Comment 3 Dimitri Glazkov 2012-01-03 17:38:32 UTC 
(In reply to comment #2)
> It was deliberate. The reason is that decorators specify a rendering, not
> markup per-se. So I was trying to use DOM as a way to specify rendering, hence
> the note about "not including UA stylesheets." But maybe that is too subtle.

Interesting. But even from CSS perspective, the class name is still there, right?
Comment 4 Dominic Cooney 2012-01-05 02:27:31 UTC 
I guess the class name is still "there", but think of it more as a reftest expected result. Maybe it should be replaced with a diagram and not markup. Or we could invent textual syntax for rendered blocks.
Comment 5 Dimitri Glazkov 2012-01-05 04:05:59 UTC 
(In reply to comment #4)
> I guess the class name is still "there", but think of it more as a reftest
> expected result. Maybe it should be replaced with a diagram and not markup. Or
> we could invent textual syntax for rendered blocks.

Sounds good. Can you file a bug? I'll fix up next time I sweep up explainer bugs.
Comment 6 Dominic Cooney 2013-05-29 02:17:19 UTC 
I look at this again and I think it is fine as-is.

I removed the note about omitting user agent styles, since they are obviously implied by "as if it was this markup" <https://dvcs.w3.org/hg/webcomponents/rev/9cb2dca32e6b>