Skip to content

Conversation

crisbeto
Copy link
Member

Based on a discussion on an earlier PR, these changes move the logic for resolving the activeElement while piercing through the shadow DOM into a common helper. Furthermore, they expand the logic to pierce through multiple layers of shadow DOM.

@crisbeto crisbeto added P3 An issue that is relevant to core functions, but does not impede progress. Important, but not urgent target: patch This PR is targeted for the next patch release labels May 17, 2021
@crisbeto crisbeto requested review from jelbourn and devversion May 17, 2021 04:59
@crisbeto crisbeto requested a review from mmalerba as a code owner May 17, 2021 04:59
@google-cla google-cla bot added the cla: yes PR author has agreed to Google's Contributor License Agreement label May 17, 2021
@crisbeto crisbeto force-pushed the shadow-dom-active-element-common branch 2 times, most recently from c78a58a to 3ca6bde Compare May 17, 2021 05:41
Based on a discussion on an earlier PR, these changes move the logic for resolving the `activeElement` while piercing through the shadow DOM into a common helper. Furthermore, they expand the logic to pierce through multiple layers of shadow DOM.
@crisbeto crisbeto force-pushed the shadow-dom-active-element-common branch from 3ca6bde to 0e09c1b Compare May 17, 2021 05:51
Copy link
Member

@devversion devversion left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Looks great to me 👍

Should we add a test with multiple layers of shadow dom somewhere? e.g. in the focus trap?

@crisbeto
Copy link
Member Author

Not sure, my concern is that we use this in several places already so would we have to copy the same tests everywhere?

@crisbeto crisbeto added the action: merge The PR is ready for merge by the caretaker label May 17, 2021
@devversion
Copy link
Member

yeah, that's true. Though we are missing at least one test ensuring multiple layers of shadow dom are handled properly. I don't feel strongly though because we can assume the nested shadow DOM layers to behave similar to the top-level one (which we test in various places as you said).

@crisbeto
Copy link
Member Author

I think that we need more test coverage for cdk/platform in general since there is none at the moment.

@wagnermaciel wagnermaciel merged commit 25665dc into angular:master May 21, 2021
wagnermaciel pushed a commit that referenced this pull request May 21, 2021
…ent (#22708)

Based on a discussion on an earlier PR, these changes move the logic for resolving the `activeElement` while piercing through the shadow DOM into a common helper. Furthermore, they expand the logic to pierce through multiple layers of shadow DOM.

(cherry picked from commit 25665dc)
@angular-automatic-lock-bot
Copy link

This issue has been automatically locked due to inactivity.
Please file a new issue if you are encountering a similar or related problem.

Read more about our automatic conversation locking policy.

This action has been performed automatically by a bot.

@angular-automatic-lock-bot angular-automatic-lock-bot bot locked and limited conversation to collaborators Jun 21, 2021
Sign up for free to subscribe to this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in.
Labels
action: merge The PR is ready for merge by the caretaker cla: yes PR author has agreed to Google's Contributor License Agreement P3 An issue that is relevant to core functions, but does not impede progress. Important, but not urgent target: patch This PR is targeted for the next patch release
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants