This is an archived snapshot of W3C's public bugzilla bug tracker, decommissioned in April 2019. Please see the home page for more details.
Clarify what is an expected behavior when an event happens on non-distributed light children. Suppose the following tree: <div id='shadow-host-A'> <shadow-root> <div id='shadow-root-child'> ...there is no <content> elements in the shadow root. <div id='light-child-1'> <div id='light-child-2'> #shadow-host-A has a shadow root, but there is no <content> element in there. So #light-child-1 and #light-child-2 don't appear in ComposedShadowTree. ComposedShadowTree is: <div id='shadow-host-A'> <div id='shadow-root-child'> And suppose an event happens on #light-child-1 (e.g. document.getElementById('light-child-1').focus()). What is expected behavior?. In algorithm of calculating adjustedParentNode used in section 6, it's not clear what is the result of 'adjustedParentNode of #light-child-1'. In my opinion, adjustedParentNode(light-chlild-1) should be 'null' instead of '#shadow-host-A' in this case. What do you think about?
Let me rethink about it.. 'adjustedParentNode(non-distributed-light-child) should be null' might cause undesirable side effects on many other parts. I should be careful about it. I just would like to know what is expected result of adjustedParentNode(non-distributed-light-child). (In reply to comment #0) > In algorithm of calculating adjustedParentNode used in section 6, it's not > clear what is the result of 'adjustedParentNode of #light-child-1'. > In my opinion, adjustedParentNode(light-chlild-1) should be 'null' instead of > '#shadow-host-A' in this case. What do you think about?
Non-distributed children should behave as typical children of the shadow host, unencumbered by shadow DOM in any way. Sounds about right? If so, will spec that way.
Yes, I've changed my mind since I filed this bug. We can close this bug and mark it WONTFIX. The work-in-progress idea already treats non-distributed-light-child as typical children of shadow host. https://docs.google.com/a/chromium.org/document/d/1PY7KkTRI-doU9Hew3Mud9JBgjj5xtVqH8sY0Ui305nw/edit (In reply to comment #2) > Non-distributed children should behave as typical children of the shadow host, > unencumbered by shadow DOM in any way. Sounds about right? If so, will spec > that way.