Bug 58914

Created attachment 90418 [details] WIP

Created attachment 90428 [details] WIP Take2

Created attachment 90469 [details] WIP Take3 - Added tests, almost ready.

Created attachment 90471 [details] Ready.

Created attachment 90476 [details] Patch

Comment on attachment 90476 [details] Patch View in context: https://bugs.webkit.org/attachment.cgi?id=90476&action=review > Source/WebCore/ChangeLog:8 > + - Introduced ShadowContentElement which hosts forwarded childrem of <summary> childrem->children > Source/WebCore/ChangeLog:11 > + - The parent look up is also aware of node forwarding. If the visual parent node has look up -> lookup > Source/WebCore/ChangeLog:12 > + a shadow root, the node is possibly forwarde to ShadowContentElement forwarde -> forwarded > Source/WebCore/dom/NodeVisualParentLookupResult.h:2 > + * Copyright (C) 2011 Google Inc. All rights reserved. At least some of the code here comes from Node.cpp, so we should probably clone the copyrights. > Source/WebCore/dom/NodeVisualParentLookupResult.h:34 > +class NodeVisualParentLookupResult { The name is awkward. The point of the class is to determine the parent node for rendering purposes and whether a renderer for it is necessary. So perhaps NodeRendererFinder? Or something like that. > Source/WebCore/dom/NodeVisualParentLookupResult.h:51 > + ContainerNode* found() const { return m_found; } parentNodeForRenderingAndStyle? > Source/WebCore/dom/ShadowRoot.cpp:101 > +void ShadowRoot::didHostChildrenChanged() hostChildrenChanged > Source/WebCore/dom/ShadowRoot.cpp:119 > + for (Node* n = firstChild(); n; n = n->traverseNextNode(this)) { > + // FIXME: This should be replaced with tag-name checking once <content> is ready. > + // See also http://webkit.org/b/56973 > + if (n->isShadowBoundary()) > + return toContainerNode(n); > + } This really bugs me, but I don't know if my idea would work. It seems that instead of re-traversing this all the time during child renderer creation, we should store the created renderers in a map, and then pull from that map as we create the renderer for <content> element.

Also,

(In reply to comment #7) > Also, ... please adjust the title in the ChangeLog.

Comment on attachment 90476 [details] Patch Let discuss this in person tomorrow.

Comment on attachment 90476 [details] Patch I slept on it and I am now generally okay with the approach as a first stab. I would still like to explore the role of <content> being more active: 1) light children attach first, but all of their renderers are stashed in to a map 2) shadow DOM attaches next 3) any time a <content> element is found, it looks in the map, collects matching renderers, and inserts them into the render tree in its place. Also, keep the new class in Node.cpp for now. We can split it out later. NodeRenderParentDetector seems like a good name.

Committed r84511: <http://trac.webkit.org/changeset/84511>

Committed r84512: <http://trac.webkit.org/changeset/84512>

http://trac.webkit.org/changeset/84511 might have broken Qt Linux Release The following tests are not passing: fast/html/details-open2.html

http://trac.webkit.org/changeset/84512 might have broken Qt Linux Release The following tests are not passing: fast/html/details-open2.html