Join GitHub today
GitHub is home to over 28 million developers working together to host and review code, manage projects, and build software together.Sign up
Should <link> work inside Shadow DOM? #628
After #530, to keep
I would like to indicate an author of the document fragment I attached to shadow root, as well as custom element definitions bulked with CSS in imports. I know imports are on hold, but is there a reason to exclude all links except
They are excluded explicitly at http://w3c.github.io/webcomponents/spec/shadow/#dfn-inert-in-a-shadow-tree but I cannot find anything similar at https://html.spec.whatwg.org/. I'm not sure whether this is still to be upstreamed (#377 (comment)) or this constraint was dropped.
Current Blink implementation blocks all
To draw my use-case: I use Shadow DOM for styling 3rd party content. So, not to break functionality, I attach HTML composition to Shadow Root.
Is your primary use case about pulling content in with HTML imports inside a shadow tree? If so, given the lack of appetite for HTML imports from browser vendors other than Google, I'm not certain if it's even valuable to spec such a behavior. It won't work on any browser but Chrome.
I don't follow. What exactly is a use case? A use case should concern a very specific scenario in which a very specific instance of
There is no clear reason, AFAIK. We are banning other
If we can find any good use case for other
referenced this issue
Apr 18, 2017
Oh I see, so now the "Shadow DOM" document both contains incorrect information for some features and the only information for some other features. Hmm.
It would be better if we indicated that more clearly in http://w3c.github.io/webcomponents/spec/shadow/#html-elements-in-shadow-trees. Then this issue can be refiled against whatwg/html though if it's just about