Support the essential part of Shadow DOM v1

Support the essential part of Shadow DOM v1

The essential part which this CL supports are:

- V1 shadow trees can be rendered correctly.
- Slot elements are no longer dummy elements. It works as the Shadow DOM spec says [1].
- Composed Tree Traversal supports both v0 and v1 distribution.
- v0 and v1 shadow trees can co-exist in the same tree of trees

New APIs are:

- NonDocumentTypeChildNode.assignedSlot
- HTMLSlotElement.getAssingedNodes
- HTMLSlotElement.getDistributedNodes
- Element's slot attribute

All new APIs are guarded by `ShadowDOMV1` runtime flag.

The following features are not implemented:

- Event path for v1 shadow trees.
- The unified redistribution across v0 and v1 shadow trees. See [2] for details.
- The fallback contents of slot elements. See [3] for details
- Distribution algorithms for v1 shadow tree are not optimized yet. See TODOs in this CL for details.
- All style related features which are specific to v1, such as `::slotted` pseudo elements.
- Closed shadow trees of v1 are not considered yet.

I'll add these missing features later as separate patches.

[1]: http://w3c.github.io/webcomponents/spec/shadow/
[2]: https://github.com/w3c/webcomponents/blob/gh-pages/proposals/shadow-dom-v1-in-blink.md#user-content-unified-distribution
[3]: https://github.com/w3c/webcomponents/issues/317

BUG=531990
Committed: https://crrev.com/071137e656e1ad78c5e8ce506346aa5d2eeef5f9
Cr-Commit-Position: refs/heads/master@{#364654}

[hayato, 2015-11-30 10:46:07]

The CQ bit was checked by hayato@chromium.org to run a CQ dry run

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2015-11-30 10:46:22]

Dry run: CQ is trying da patch. Follow status at
 https://chromium-cq-status.appspot.com/patch-status/1489433002/1
View timeline at
 https://chromium-cq-status.appspot.com/patch-timeline/1489433002/1

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2015-11-30 10:58:29]

The CQ bit was unchecked by commit-bot@chromium.org

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2015-11-30 10:58:30]

Dry run: Try jobs failed on following builders:
  mac_chromium_gn_rel on tryserver.chromium.mac (JOB_FAILED,
http://build.chromium.org/p/tryserver.chromium.mac/builders/mac_chromium_gn_r...)

[hayato, 2015-12-01 05:57:47]

Description was changed from

==========
WIP: Shadow DOM v1

BUG=
==========

to

==========
WIP: Shadow DOM v1 - proof of concept

BUG=531990
==========

[hayato, 2015-12-01 06:16:26]

The CQ bit was checked by hayato@chromium.org to run a CQ dry run

[hayato, 2015-12-01 06:16:29]

wip

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2015-12-01 06:17:12]

Dry run: CQ is trying da patch. Follow status at
 https://chromium-cq-status.appspot.com/patch-status/1489433002/20001
View timeline at
 https://chromium-cq-status.appspot.com/patch-timeline/1489433002/20001

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2015-12-01 07:26:17]

The CQ bit was unchecked by commit-bot@chromium.org

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2015-12-01 07:26:18]

Dry run: Try jobs failed on following builders:
  win_chromium_rel_ng on tryserver.chromium.win (JOB_FAILED,
http://build.chromium.org/p/tryserver.chromium.win/builders/win_chromium_rel_...)

[hayato, 2015-12-01 10:30:59]

Description was changed from

==========
WIP: Shadow DOM v1 - proof of concept

BUG=531990
==========

to

==========
WIP: Shadow DOM v1 - proof of concept

- Support v0 and v1 shadow trees being in the same tree of trees
- No support redistribution across v0 and v1 shadow trees

BUG=531990
==========

[hayato, 2015-12-01 10:31:19]

Description was changed from

==========
WIP: Shadow DOM v1 - proof of concept

- Support v0 and v1 shadow trees being in the same tree of trees
- No support redistribution across v0 and v1 shadow trees

BUG=531990
==========

to

==========
WIP: Shadow DOM v1 - proof of concept

- Support v0 and v1 shadow trees being in the same tree of trees
- No support for redistribution across v0 and v1 shadow trees

BUG=531990
==========

[hayato, 2015-12-04 12:09:29]

The CQ bit was checked by hayato@chromium.org to run a CQ dry run

[hayato, 2015-12-04 12:09:33]

wip

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2015-12-04 12:09:42]

Dry run: CQ is trying da patch. Follow status at
 https://chromium-cq-status.appspot.com/patch-status/1489433002/40001
View timeline at
 https://chromium-cq-status.appspot.com/patch-timeline/1489433002/40001

[hayato, 2015-12-04 12:16:25]

Description was changed from

==========
WIP: Shadow DOM v1 - proof of concept

- Support v0 and v1 shadow trees being in the same tree of trees
- No support for redistribution across v0 and v1 shadow trees

BUG=531990
==========

to

==========
Support essential part of Shadow DOM v1

- Support v0 and v1 shadow trees being in the same tree of trees
- No support for redistribution across v0 and v1 shadow trees

BUG=531990
==========

[hayato, 2015-12-04 12:41:56]

Description was changed from

==========
Support essential part of Shadow DOM v1

- Support v0 and v1 shadow trees being in the same tree of trees
- No support for redistribution across v0 and v1 shadow trees

BUG=531990
==========

to

==========
Support essential part of Shadow DOM v1

WIP: The description should be updated.

New APIs are:

- Support NonDocumentChildrenType.assignedSlot
- Support HTMLSlotElement.getDistributedNodes
- Support HTMLSlotElement.getAssingedNodes
- Support Element's slot attribute

All new APIs are guarded by ShadowDOMV1 runtime flag.

This CL implements:

- getDistributedNodes algorithms
- getDistributedNodes algorithms

Now v1 shadow trees can be rendered correctly.
The co-existence of v0 and v1 shadow trees in the same document is also
supported.

The following features are not implemented yet:

- Event path for v1 shadow trees. This is not tested yet.
- Unified distribution across v0 and v1 shadow trees. See aa for details.
- Fallback contents of slot elements. See xxx for details
- Dynamic DOM mutation in v1 shadow trees is not yet tested well.
- Distribution mechanism for v1 is not optimized yet. The performance
optimization will come later. See TODO items in CL for details.

BUG=531990
==========

[hayato, 2015-12-04 12:44:17]

Description was changed from

==========
Support essential part of Shadow DOM v1

WIP: The description should be updated.

New APIs are:

- Support NonDocumentChildrenType.assignedSlot
- Support HTMLSlotElement.getDistributedNodes
- Support HTMLSlotElement.getAssingedNodes
- Support Element's slot attribute

All new APIs are guarded by ShadowDOMV1 runtime flag.

This CL implements:

- getDistributedNodes algorithms
- getDistributedNodes algorithms

Now v1 shadow trees can be rendered correctly.
The co-existence of v0 and v1 shadow trees in the same document is also
supported.

The following features are not implemented yet:

- Event path for v1 shadow trees. This is not tested yet.
- Unified distribution across v0 and v1 shadow trees. See aa for details.
- Fallback contents of slot elements. See xxx for details
- Dynamic DOM mutation in v1 shadow trees is not yet tested well.
- Distribution mechanism for v1 is not optimized yet. The performance
optimization will come later. See TODO items in CL for details.

BUG=531990
==========

to

==========
Support the essential part of Shadow DOM v1

WIP: The description should be updated.

New APIs are:

- Support NonDocumentChildrenType.assignedSlot
- Support HTMLSlotElement.getDistributedNodes
- Support HTMLSlotElement.getAssingedNodes
- Support Element's slot attribute

All new APIs are guarded by ShadowDOMV1 runtime flag.

This CL implements:

- getDistributedNodes algorithms
- getDistributedNodes algorithms

Now v1 shadow trees can be rendered correctly.
The co-existence of v0 and v1 shadow trees in the same document is also
supported.

The following features are not implemented yet:

- Event path for v1 shadow trees. This is not tested yet.
- Unified distribution across v0 and v1 shadow trees. See aa for details.
- Fallback contents of slot elements. See xxx for details
- Dynamic DOM mutation in v1 shadow trees is not yet tested well.
- Distribution mechanism for v1 is not optimized yet. The performance
optimization will come later. See TODO items in CL for details.

BUG=531990
==========

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2015-12-04 13:38:06]

The CQ bit was unchecked by commit-bot@chromium.org

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2015-12-04 13:38:06]

Dry run: Try jobs failed on following builders:
  mac_chromium_rel_ng on tryserver.chromium.mac (JOB_FAILED,
http://build.chromium.org/p/tryserver.chromium.mac/builders/mac_chromium_rel_...)

[hayato, 2015-12-08 09:33:05]

The CQ bit was checked by hayato@chromium.org to run a CQ dry run

[hayato, 2015-12-08 09:33:11]

wip

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2015-12-08 09:33:29]

Dry run: CQ is trying da patch. Follow status at
 https://chromium-cq-status.appspot.com/patch-status/1489433002/60001
View timeline at
 https://chromium-cq-status.appspot.com/patch-timeline/1489433002/60001

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2015-12-08 10:03:32]

The CQ bit was unchecked by commit-bot@chromium.org

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2015-12-08 10:03:33]

Dry run: Try jobs failed on following builders:
  chromeos_amd64-generic_chromium_compile_only_ng on tryserver.chromium.linux
(JOB_FAILED,
http://build.chromium.org/p/tryserver.chromium.linux/builders/chromeos_amd64-...)
  linux_chromium_chromeos_ozone_rel_ng on tryserver.chromium.linux (JOB_FAILED,
http://build.chromium.org/p/tryserver.chromium.linux/builders/linux_chromium_...)
  linux_chromium_chromeos_rel_ng on tryserver.chromium.linux (JOB_FAILED,
http://build.chromium.org/p/tryserver.chromium.linux/builders/linux_chromium_...)

[hayato, 2015-12-08 10:27:56]

Description was changed from

==========
Support the essential part of Shadow DOM v1

WIP: The description should be updated.

New APIs are:

- Support NonDocumentChildrenType.assignedSlot
- Support HTMLSlotElement.getDistributedNodes
- Support HTMLSlotElement.getAssingedNodes
- Support Element's slot attribute

All new APIs are guarded by ShadowDOMV1 runtime flag.

This CL implements:

- getDistributedNodes algorithms
- getDistributedNodes algorithms

Now v1 shadow trees can be rendered correctly.
The co-existence of v0 and v1 shadow trees in the same document is also
supported.

The following features are not implemented yet:

- Event path for v1 shadow trees. This is not tested yet.
- Unified distribution across v0 and v1 shadow trees. See aa for details.
- Fallback contents of slot elements. See xxx for details
- Dynamic DOM mutation in v1 shadow trees is not yet tested well.
- Distribution mechanism for v1 is not optimized yet. The performance
optimization will come later. See TODO items in CL for details.

BUG=531990
==========

to

==========
Support the essential part of Shadow DOM v1

The essential parts which this CL supports are:

- V1 shadow trees can be rendered correctly.
- Slot elements are no longer dummy elements. It works as the Shadow DOM spec
says [1].
- Composed Tree Traversal support both v0 and v1 distribution.
- v0 and v1 shadow trees can co-exit in the same tree of trees

New APIs are:

- NonDocumentChildrenType.assignedSlot
- HTMLSlotElement.getAssingedNodes
- HTMLSlotElement.getDistributedNodes
- Element's slot attribute

All new APIs are guarded by ShadowDOMV1 runtime flag.

The following features are not implemented yet:

- Event path for v1 shadow trees. This feature is not well tested yet.
- The unified redistribution across v0 and v1 shadow trees. See [2] for details.

- The fallback contents of slot elements. See [3] for details
- Dynamic DOM mutation in v1 shadow trees is not yet tested well.
- Distribution algorithms for v1 shadow tree is not optimized yet. See TODO in
this CL for details.

[1]: http://w3c.github.io/webcomponents/spec/shadow/
[2]:
https://github.com/w3c/webcomponents/blob/gh-pages/proposals/shadow-dom-v1-in...
[3]: https://github.com/w3c/webcomponents/issues/317

I'll add these missing features later as separate patch series.

BUG=531990
==========

[hayato, 2015-12-08 10:28:21]

Description was changed from

==========
Support the essential part of Shadow DOM v1

The essential parts which this CL supports are:

- V1 shadow trees can be rendered correctly.
- Slot elements are no longer dummy elements. It works as the Shadow DOM spec
says [1].
- Composed Tree Traversal support both v0 and v1 distribution.
- v0 and v1 shadow trees can co-exit in the same tree of trees

New APIs are:

- NonDocumentChildrenType.assignedSlot
- HTMLSlotElement.getAssingedNodes
- HTMLSlotElement.getDistributedNodes
- Element's slot attribute

All new APIs are guarded by ShadowDOMV1 runtime flag.

The following features are not implemented yet:

- Event path for v1 shadow trees. This feature is not well tested yet.
- The unified redistribution across v0 and v1 shadow trees. See [2] for details.

- The fallback contents of slot elements. See [3] for details
- Dynamic DOM mutation in v1 shadow trees is not yet tested well.
- Distribution algorithms for v1 shadow tree is not optimized yet. See TODO in
this CL for details.

[1]: http://w3c.github.io/webcomponents/spec/shadow/
[2]:
https://github.com/w3c/webcomponents/blob/gh-pages/proposals/shadow-dom-v1-in...
[3]: https://github.com/w3c/webcomponents/issues/317

I'll add these missing features later as separate patch series.

BUG=531990
==========

to

==========
Support the essential part of Shadow DOM v1

The essential parts which this CL supports are:

- V1 shadow trees can be rendered correctly.
- Slot elements are no longer dummy elements. It works as the Shadow DOM spec
says [1].
- Composed Tree Traversal supports both v0 and v1 distribution.
- v0 and v1 shadow trees can co-exit in the same tree of trees

New APIs are:

- NonDocumentChildrenType.assignedSlot
- HTMLSlotElement.getAssingedNodes
- HTMLSlotElement.getDistributedNodes
- Element's slot attribute

All new APIs are guarded by ShadowDOMV1 runtime flag.

The following features are not implemented yet:

- Event path for v1 shadow trees. This feature is not well tested yet.
- The unified redistribution across v0 and v1 shadow trees. See [2] for details.

- The fallback contents of slot elements. See [3] for details
- Dynamic DOM mutation in v1 shadow trees is not yet tested well.
- Distribution algorithms for v1 shadow tree is not optimized yet. See TODO in
this CL for details.

[1]: http://w3c.github.io/webcomponents/spec/shadow/
[2]:
https://github.com/w3c/webcomponents/blob/gh-pages/proposals/shadow-dom-v1-in...
[3]: https://github.com/w3c/webcomponents/issues/317

I'll add these missing features later as separate patch series.

BUG=531990
==========

[hayato, 2015-12-08 10:28:34]

Description was changed from

==========
Support the essential part of Shadow DOM v1

The essential parts which this CL supports are:

- V1 shadow trees can be rendered correctly.
- Slot elements are no longer dummy elements. It works as the Shadow DOM spec
says [1].
- Composed Tree Traversal supports both v0 and v1 distribution.
- v0 and v1 shadow trees can co-exit in the same tree of trees

New APIs are:

- NonDocumentChildrenType.assignedSlot
- HTMLSlotElement.getAssingedNodes
- HTMLSlotElement.getDistributedNodes
- Element's slot attribute

All new APIs are guarded by ShadowDOMV1 runtime flag.

The following features are not implemented yet:

- Event path for v1 shadow trees. This feature is not well tested yet.
- The unified redistribution across v0 and v1 shadow trees. See [2] for details.

- The fallback contents of slot elements. See [3] for details
- Dynamic DOM mutation in v1 shadow trees is not yet tested well.
- Distribution algorithms for v1 shadow tree is not optimized yet. See TODO in
this CL for details.

[1]: http://w3c.github.io/webcomponents/spec/shadow/
[2]:
https://github.com/w3c/webcomponents/blob/gh-pages/proposals/shadow-dom-v1-in...
[3]: https://github.com/w3c/webcomponents/issues/317

I'll add these missing features later as separate patch series.

BUG=531990
==========

to

==========
Support the essential part of Shadow DOM v1

The essential parts which this CL supports are:

- V1 shadow trees can be rendered correctly.
- Slot elements are no longer dummy elements. It works as the Shadow DOM spec
says [1].
- Composed Tree Traversal supports both v0 and v1 distribution.
- v0 and v1 shadow trees can co-exist in the same tree of trees

New APIs are:

- NonDocumentChildrenType.assignedSlot
- HTMLSlotElement.getAssingedNodes
- HTMLSlotElement.getDistributedNodes
- Element's slot attribute

All new APIs are guarded by ShadowDOMV1 runtime flag.

The following features are not implemented yet:

- Event path for v1 shadow trees. This feature is not well tested yet.
- The unified redistribution across v0 and v1 shadow trees. See [2] for details.

- The fallback contents of slot elements. See [3] for details
- Dynamic DOM mutation in v1 shadow trees is not yet tested well.
- Distribution algorithms for v1 shadow tree is not optimized yet. See TODO in
this CL for details.

[1]: http://w3c.github.io/webcomponents/spec/shadow/
[2]:
https://github.com/w3c/webcomponents/blob/gh-pages/proposals/shadow-dom-v1-in...
[3]: https://github.com/w3c/webcomponents/issues/317

I'll add these missing features later as separate patch series.

BUG=531990
==========

[hayato, 2015-12-08 10:30:03]

Description was changed from

==========
Support the essential part of Shadow DOM v1

The essential parts which this CL supports are:

- V1 shadow trees can be rendered correctly.
- Slot elements are no longer dummy elements. It works as the Shadow DOM spec
says [1].
- Composed Tree Traversal supports both v0 and v1 distribution.
- v0 and v1 shadow trees can co-exist in the same tree of trees

New APIs are:

- NonDocumentChildrenType.assignedSlot
- HTMLSlotElement.getAssingedNodes
- HTMLSlotElement.getDistributedNodes
- Element's slot attribute

All new APIs are guarded by ShadowDOMV1 runtime flag.

The following features are not implemented yet:

- Event path for v1 shadow trees. This feature is not well tested yet.
- The unified redistribution across v0 and v1 shadow trees. See [2] for details.

- The fallback contents of slot elements. See [3] for details
- Dynamic DOM mutation in v1 shadow trees is not yet tested well.
- Distribution algorithms for v1 shadow tree is not optimized yet. See TODO in
this CL for details.

[1]: http://w3c.github.io/webcomponents/spec/shadow/
[2]:
https://github.com/w3c/webcomponents/blob/gh-pages/proposals/shadow-dom-v1-in...
[3]: https://github.com/w3c/webcomponents/issues/317

I'll add these missing features later as separate patch series.

BUG=531990
==========

to

==========
Support the essential part of Shadow DOM v1

The essential parts which this CL supports are:

- V1 shadow trees can be rendered correctly.
- Slot elements are no longer dummy elements. It works as the Shadow DOM spec
says [1].
- Composed Tree Traversal supports both v0 and v1 distribution.
- v0 and v1 shadow trees can co-exist in the same tree of trees

New APIs are:

- NonDocumentChildrenType.assignedSlot
- HTMLSlotElement.getAssingedNodes
- HTMLSlotElement.getDistributedNodes
- Element's slot attribute

All new APIs are guarded by ShadowDOMV1 runtime flag.

The following features are not implemented yet:

- Event path for v1 shadow trees. This feature is not well tested yet.
- The unified redistribution across v0 and v1 shadow trees. See [2] for details.
- The fallback contents of slot elements. See [3] for details
- Dynamic DOM mutation in v1 shadow trees is not yet tested well.
- Distribution algorithms for v1 shadow tree is not optimized yet. See TODO in
this CL for details.
- All style related features which is specific to v1, such as `::slotted` pseudo
elements.

[1]: http://w3c.github.io/webcomponents/spec/shadow/
[2]:
https://github.com/w3c/webcomponents/blob/gh-pages/proposals/shadow-dom-v1-in...
[3]: https://github.com/w3c/webcomponents/issues/317

I'll add these missing features later as separate patch series.

BUG=531990
==========

[hayato, 2015-12-08 10:32:41]

Description was changed from

==========
Support the essential part of Shadow DOM v1

The essential parts which this CL supports are:

- V1 shadow trees can be rendered correctly.
- Slot elements are no longer dummy elements. It works as the Shadow DOM spec
says [1].
- Composed Tree Traversal supports both v0 and v1 distribution.
- v0 and v1 shadow trees can co-exist in the same tree of trees

New APIs are:

- NonDocumentChildrenType.assignedSlot
- HTMLSlotElement.getAssingedNodes
- HTMLSlotElement.getDistributedNodes
- Element's slot attribute

All new APIs are guarded by ShadowDOMV1 runtime flag.

The following features are not implemented yet:

- Event path for v1 shadow trees. This feature is not well tested yet.
- The unified redistribution across v0 and v1 shadow trees. See [2] for details.
- The fallback contents of slot elements. See [3] for details
- Dynamic DOM mutation in v1 shadow trees is not yet tested well.
- Distribution algorithms for v1 shadow tree is not optimized yet. See TODO in
this CL for details.
- All style related features which is specific to v1, such as `::slotted` pseudo
elements.

[1]: http://w3c.github.io/webcomponents/spec/shadow/
[2]:
https://github.com/w3c/webcomponents/blob/gh-pages/proposals/shadow-dom-v1-in...
[3]: https://github.com/w3c/webcomponents/issues/317

I'll add these missing features later as separate patch series.

BUG=531990
==========

to

==========
Support the essential part of Shadow DOM v1

The essential parts which this CL supports are:

- V1 shadow trees can be rendered correctly.
- Slot elements are no longer dummy elements. It works as the Shadow DOM spec
says [1].
- Composed Tree Traversal supports both v0 and v1 distribution.
- v0 and v1 shadow trees can co-exist in the same tree of trees

New APIs are:

- NonDocumentChildrenType.assignedSlot
- HTMLSlotElement.getAssingedNodes
- HTMLSlotElement.getDistributedNodes
- Element's slot attribute

All new APIs are guarded by ShadowDOMV1 runtime flag.

The following features are not implemented yet:

- Event path for v1 shadow trees. This feature is not well tested yet.
- The unified redistribution across v0 and v1 shadow trees. See [2] for details.
- The fallback contents of slot elements. See [3] for details
- Dynamic DOM mutation in v1 shadow trees is not yet tested well.
- Distribution algorithms for v1 shadow tree is not optimized yet. See TODO in
this CL for details.
- All style related features which is specific to v1, such as `::slotted` pseudo
elements.

I'll add these missing features later as separate patch series.

[1]: http://w3c.github.io/webcomponents/spec/shadow/
[2]:
https://github.com/w3c/webcomponents/blob/gh-pages/proposals/shadow-dom-v1-in...
[3]: https://github.com/w3c/webcomponents/issues/317

BUG=531990
==========

[hayato, 2015-12-08 10:33:21]

Description was changed from

==========
Support the essential part of Shadow DOM v1

The essential parts which this CL supports are:

- V1 shadow trees can be rendered correctly.
- Slot elements are no longer dummy elements. It works as the Shadow DOM spec
says [1].
- Composed Tree Traversal supports both v0 and v1 distribution.
- v0 and v1 shadow trees can co-exist in the same tree of trees

New APIs are:

- NonDocumentChildrenType.assignedSlot
- HTMLSlotElement.getAssingedNodes
- HTMLSlotElement.getDistributedNodes
- Element's slot attribute

All new APIs are guarded by ShadowDOMV1 runtime flag.

The following features are not implemented yet:

- Event path for v1 shadow trees. This feature is not well tested yet.
- The unified redistribution across v0 and v1 shadow trees. See [2] for details.
- The fallback contents of slot elements. See [3] for details
- Dynamic DOM mutation in v1 shadow trees is not yet tested well.
- Distribution algorithms for v1 shadow tree is not optimized yet. See TODO in
this CL for details.
- All style related features which is specific to v1, such as `::slotted` pseudo
elements.

I'll add these missing features later as separate patch series.

[1]: http://w3c.github.io/webcomponents/spec/shadow/
[2]:
https://github.com/w3c/webcomponents/blob/gh-pages/proposals/shadow-dom-v1-in...
[3]: https://github.com/w3c/webcomponents/issues/317

BUG=531990
==========

to

==========
Support the essential part of Shadow DOM v1

The essential parts which this CL supports are:

- V1 shadow trees can be rendered correctly.
- Slot elements are no longer dummy elements. It works as the Shadow DOM spec
says [1].
- Composed Tree Traversal supports both v0 and v1 distribution.
- v0 and v1 shadow trees can co-exist in the same tree of trees

New APIs are:

- NonDocumentChildrenType.assignedSlot
- HTMLSlotElement.getAssingedNodes
- HTMLSlotElement.getDistributedNodes
- Element's slot attribute

All new APIs are guarded by `ShadowDOMV1` runtime flag.

The following features are not implemented yet:

- Event path for v1 shadow trees. This feature is not well tested yet.
- The unified redistribution across v0 and v1 shadow trees. See [2] for details.
- The fallback contents of slot elements. See [3] for details
- Dynamic DOM mutation in v1 shadow trees is not yet tested well.
- Distribution algorithms for v1 shadow tree is not optimized yet. See TODO in
this CL for details.
- All style related features which is specific to v1, such as `::slotted` pseudo
elements.

I'll add these missing features later as separate patch series.

[1]: http://w3c.github.io/webcomponents/spec/shadow/
[2]:
https://github.com/w3c/webcomponents/blob/gh-pages/proposals/shadow-dom-v1-in...
[3]: https://github.com/w3c/webcomponents/issues/317

BUG=531990
==========

[hayato, 2015-12-08 11:30:32]

The CQ bit was checked by hayato@chromium.org to run a CQ dry run

[hayato, 2015-12-08 11:30:34]

wip

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2015-12-08 11:30:40]

Dry run: CQ is trying da patch. Follow status at
 https://chromium-cq-status.appspot.com/patch-status/1489433002/80001
View timeline at
 https://chromium-cq-status.appspot.com/patch-timeline/1489433002/80001

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2015-12-08 12:08:54]

The CQ bit was unchecked by commit-bot@chromium.org

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2015-12-08 12:08:54]

Dry run: Try jobs failed on following builders:
  linux_chromium_chromeos_ozone_rel_ng on tryserver.chromium.linux (JOB_FAILED,
http://build.chromium.org/p/tryserver.chromium.linux/builders/linux_chromium_...)

[hayato, 2015-12-09 06:45:36]

The CQ bit was checked by hayato@chromium.org to run a CQ dry run

[hayato, 2015-12-09 06:45:40]

wip

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2015-12-09 06:45:43]

Dry run: CQ is trying da patch. Follow status at
 https://chromium-cq-status.appspot.com/patch-status/1489433002/100001
View timeline at
 https://chromium-cq-status.appspot.com/patch-timeline/1489433002/100001

[hayato, 2015-12-09 06:46:58]

Description was changed from

==========
Support the essential part of Shadow DOM v1

The essential parts which this CL supports are:

- V1 shadow trees can be rendered correctly.
- Slot elements are no longer dummy elements. It works as the Shadow DOM spec
says [1].
- Composed Tree Traversal supports both v0 and v1 distribution.
- v0 and v1 shadow trees can co-exist in the same tree of trees

New APIs are:

- NonDocumentChildrenType.assignedSlot
- HTMLSlotElement.getAssingedNodes
- HTMLSlotElement.getDistributedNodes
- Element's slot attribute

All new APIs are guarded by `ShadowDOMV1` runtime flag.

The following features are not implemented yet:

- Event path for v1 shadow trees. This feature is not well tested yet.
- The unified redistribution across v0 and v1 shadow trees. See [2] for details.
- The fallback contents of slot elements. See [3] for details
- Dynamic DOM mutation in v1 shadow trees is not yet tested well.
- Distribution algorithms for v1 shadow tree is not optimized yet. See TODO in
this CL for details.
- All style related features which is specific to v1, such as `::slotted` pseudo
elements.

I'll add these missing features later as separate patch series.

[1]: http://w3c.github.io/webcomponents/spec/shadow/
[2]:
https://github.com/w3c/webcomponents/blob/gh-pages/proposals/shadow-dom-v1-in...
[3]: https://github.com/w3c/webcomponents/issues/317

BUG=531990
==========

to

==========
Support the essential part of Shadow DOM v1

The essential parts which this CL supports are:

- V1 shadow trees can be rendered correctly.
- Slot elements are no longer dummy elements. It works as the Shadow DOM spec
says [1].
- Composed Tree Traversal supports both v0 and v1 distribution.
- v0 and v1 shadow trees can co-exist in the same tree of trees

New APIs are:

- NonDocumentChildrenType.assignedSlot
- HTMLSlotElement.getAssingedNodes
- HTMLSlotElement.getDistributedNodes
- Element's slot attribute

All new APIs are guarded by `ShadowDOMV1` runtime flag.

The following features are not implemented yet:

- Event path for v1 shadow trees. This feature is not well tested yet.
- The unified redistribution across v0 and v1 shadow trees. See [2] for details.
- The fallback contents of slot elements. See [3] for details
- Dynamic DOM mutation in v1 shadow trees is not yet tested well.
- Distribution algorithms for v1 shadow tree is not optimized yet. See TODO in
this CL for details.
- All style related features which is specific to v1, such as `::slotted` pseudo
elements.

I'll add these missing features later as separate patches.

[1]: http://w3c.github.io/webcomponents/spec/shadow/
[2]:
https://github.com/w3c/webcomponents/blob/gh-pages/proposals/shadow-dom-v1-in...
[3]: https://github.com/w3c/webcomponents/issues/317

BUG=531990
==========

[hayato, 2015-12-09 06:52:58]

Description was changed from

==========
Support the essential part of Shadow DOM v1

The essential parts which this CL supports are:

- V1 shadow trees can be rendered correctly.
- Slot elements are no longer dummy elements. It works as the Shadow DOM spec
says [1].
- Composed Tree Traversal supports both v0 and v1 distribution.
- v0 and v1 shadow trees can co-exist in the same tree of trees

New APIs are:

- NonDocumentChildrenType.assignedSlot
- HTMLSlotElement.getAssingedNodes
- HTMLSlotElement.getDistributedNodes
- Element's slot attribute

All new APIs are guarded by `ShadowDOMV1` runtime flag.

The following features are not implemented yet:

- Event path for v1 shadow trees. This feature is not well tested yet.
- The unified redistribution across v0 and v1 shadow trees. See [2] for details.
- The fallback contents of slot elements. See [3] for details
- Dynamic DOM mutation in v1 shadow trees is not yet tested well.
- Distribution algorithms for v1 shadow tree is not optimized yet. See TODO in
this CL for details.
- All style related features which is specific to v1, such as `::slotted` pseudo
elements.

I'll add these missing features later as separate patches.

[1]: http://w3c.github.io/webcomponents/spec/shadow/
[2]:
https://github.com/w3c/webcomponents/blob/gh-pages/proposals/shadow-dom-v1-in...
[3]: https://github.com/w3c/webcomponents/issues/317

BUG=531990
==========

to

==========
Support the essential part of Shadow DOM v1

The essential part which this CL supports are:

- V1 shadow trees can be rendered correctly.
- Slot elements are no longer dummy elements. It works as the Shadow DOM spec
says [1].
- Composed Tree Traversal supports both v0 and v1 distribution.
- v0 and v1 shadow trees can co-exist in the same tree of trees

New APIs are:

- NonDocumentChildrenType.assignedSlot
- HTMLSlotElement.getAssingedNodes
- HTMLSlotElement.getDistributedNodes
- Element's slot attribute

All new APIs are guarded by `ShadowDOMV1` runtime flag.

The following features are not implemented:

- Event path for v1 shadow trees.
- The unified redistribution across v0 and v1 shadow trees. See [2] for details.
- The fallback contents of slot elements. See [3] for details
- Distribution algorithms for v1 shadow tree is not optimized yet. See TODOs in
this CL for details.
- All style related features which is specific to v1, such as `::slotted` pseudo
elements.

I'll add these missing features later as separate patches.

[1]: http://w3c.github.io/webcomponents/spec/shadow/
[2]:
https://github.com/w3c/webcomponents/blob/gh-pages/proposals/shadow-dom-v1-in...
[3]: https://github.com/w3c/webcomponents/issues/317

BUG=531990
==========

[hayato, 2015-12-09 06:57:40]

hayato@chromium.org changed reviewers:
+ kochi@chromium.org, tkent@chromium.org

[hayato, 2015-12-09 06:57:41]

PTAL

[hayato, 2015-12-09 06:58:31]

Description was changed from

==========
Support the essential part of Shadow DOM v1

The essential part which this CL supports are:

- V1 shadow trees can be rendered correctly.
- Slot elements are no longer dummy elements. It works as the Shadow DOM spec
says [1].
- Composed Tree Traversal supports both v0 and v1 distribution.
- v0 and v1 shadow trees can co-exist in the same tree of trees

New APIs are:

- NonDocumentChildrenType.assignedSlot
- HTMLSlotElement.getAssingedNodes
- HTMLSlotElement.getDistributedNodes
- Element's slot attribute

All new APIs are guarded by `ShadowDOMV1` runtime flag.

The following features are not implemented:

- Event path for v1 shadow trees.
- The unified redistribution across v0 and v1 shadow trees. See [2] for details.
- The fallback contents of slot elements. See [3] for details
- Distribution algorithms for v1 shadow tree is not optimized yet. See TODOs in
this CL for details.
- All style related features which is specific to v1, such as `::slotted` pseudo
elements.

I'll add these missing features later as separate patches.

[1]: http://w3c.github.io/webcomponents/spec/shadow/
[2]:
https://github.com/w3c/webcomponents/blob/gh-pages/proposals/shadow-dom-v1-in...
[3]: https://github.com/w3c/webcomponents/issues/317

BUG=531990
==========

to

==========
Support the essential part of Shadow DOM v1

The essential part which this CL supports are:

- V1 shadow trees can be rendered correctly.
- Slot elements are no longer dummy elements. It works as the Shadow DOM spec
says [1].
- Composed Tree Traversal supports both v0 and v1 distribution.
- v0 and v1 shadow trees can co-exist in the same tree of trees

New APIs are:

- NonDocumentTypeChildNode.assignedSlot
- HTMLSlotElement.getAssingedNodes
- HTMLSlotElement.getDistributedNodes
- Element's slot attribute

All new APIs are guarded by `ShadowDOMV1` runtime flag.

The following features are not implemented:

- Event path for v1 shadow trees.
- The unified redistribution across v0 and v1 shadow trees. See [2] for details.
- The fallback contents of slot elements. See [3] for details
- Distribution algorithms for v1 shadow tree is not optimized yet. See TODOs in
this CL for details.
- All style related features which is specific to v1, such as `::slotted` pseudo
elements.

I'll add these missing features later as separate patches.

[1]: http://w3c.github.io/webcomponents/spec/shadow/
[2]:
https://github.com/w3c/webcomponents/blob/gh-pages/proposals/shadow-dom-v1-in...
[3]: https://github.com/w3c/webcomponents/issues/317

BUG=531990
==========

[hayato, 2015-12-09 06:59:27]

Description was changed from

==========
Support the essential part of Shadow DOM v1

The essential part which this CL supports are:

- V1 shadow trees can be rendered correctly.
- Slot elements are no longer dummy elements. It works as the Shadow DOM spec
says [1].
- Composed Tree Traversal supports both v0 and v1 distribution.
- v0 and v1 shadow trees can co-exist in the same tree of trees

New APIs are:

- NonDocumentTypeChildNode.assignedSlot
- HTMLSlotElement.getAssingedNodes
- HTMLSlotElement.getDistributedNodes
- Element's slot attribute

All new APIs are guarded by `ShadowDOMV1` runtime flag.

The following features are not implemented:

- Event path for v1 shadow trees.
- The unified redistribution across v0 and v1 shadow trees. See [2] for details.
- The fallback contents of slot elements. See [3] for details
- Distribution algorithms for v1 shadow tree is not optimized yet. See TODOs in
this CL for details.
- All style related features which is specific to v1, such as `::slotted` pseudo
elements.

I'll add these missing features later as separate patches.

[1]: http://w3c.github.io/webcomponents/spec/shadow/
[2]:
https://github.com/w3c/webcomponents/blob/gh-pages/proposals/shadow-dom-v1-in...
[3]: https://github.com/w3c/webcomponents/issues/317

BUG=531990
==========

to

==========
Support the essential part of Shadow DOM v1

The essential part which this CL supports are:

- V1 shadow trees can be rendered correctly.
- Slot elements are no longer dummy elements. It works as the Shadow DOM spec
says [1].
- Composed Tree Traversal supports both v0 and v1 distribution.
- v0 and v1 shadow trees can co-exist in the same tree of trees

New APIs are:

- NonDocumentTypeChildNode.assignedSlot
- HTMLSlotElement.getAssingedNodes
- HTMLSlotElement.getDistributedNodes
- Element's slot attribute

All new APIs are guarded by `ShadowDOMV1` runtime flag.

The following features are not implemented:

- Event path for v1 shadow trees.
- The unified redistribution across v0 and v1 shadow trees. See [2] for details.
- The fallback contents of slot elements. See [3] for details
- Distribution algorithms for v1 shadow tree is not optimized yet. See TODOs in
this CL for details.
- All style related features which are specific to v1, such as `::slotted`
pseudo elements.

I'll add these missing features later as separate patches.

[1]: http://w3c.github.io/webcomponents/spec/shadow/
[2]:
https://github.com/w3c/webcomponents/blob/gh-pages/proposals/shadow-dom-v1-in...
[3]: https://github.com/w3c/webcomponents/issues/317

BUG=531990
==========

[hayato, 2015-12-09 07:00:39]

Description was changed from

==========
Support the essential part of Shadow DOM v1

The essential part which this CL supports are:

- V1 shadow trees can be rendered correctly.
- Slot elements are no longer dummy elements. It works as the Shadow DOM spec
says [1].
- Composed Tree Traversal supports both v0 and v1 distribution.
- v0 and v1 shadow trees can co-exist in the same tree of trees

New APIs are:

- NonDocumentTypeChildNode.assignedSlot
- HTMLSlotElement.getAssingedNodes
- HTMLSlotElement.getDistributedNodes
- Element's slot attribute

All new APIs are guarded by `ShadowDOMV1` runtime flag.

The following features are not implemented:

- Event path for v1 shadow trees.
- The unified redistribution across v0 and v1 shadow trees. See [2] for details.
- The fallback contents of slot elements. See [3] for details
- Distribution algorithms for v1 shadow tree is not optimized yet. See TODOs in
this CL for details.
- All style related features which are specific to v1, such as `::slotted`
pseudo elements.

I'll add these missing features later as separate patches.

[1]: http://w3c.github.io/webcomponents/spec/shadow/
[2]:
https://github.com/w3c/webcomponents/blob/gh-pages/proposals/shadow-dom-v1-in...
[3]: https://github.com/w3c/webcomponents/issues/317

BUG=531990
==========

to

==========
Support the essential part of Shadow DOM v1

The essential part which this CL supports are:

- V1 shadow trees can be rendered correctly.
- Slot elements are no longer dummy elements. It works as the Shadow DOM spec
says [1].
- Composed Tree Traversal supports both v0 and v1 distribution.
- v0 and v1 shadow trees can co-exist in the same tree of trees

New APIs are:

- NonDocumentTypeChildNode.assignedSlot
- HTMLSlotElement.getAssingedNodes
- HTMLSlotElement.getDistributedNodes
- Element's slot attribute

All new APIs are guarded by `ShadowDOMV1` runtime flag.

The following features are not implemented:

- Event path for v1 shadow trees.
- The unified redistribution across v0 and v1 shadow trees. See [2] for details.
- The fallback contents of slot elements. See [3] for details
- Distribution algorithms for v1 shadow tree are not optimized yet. See TODOs in
this CL for details.
- All style related features which are specific to v1, such as `::slotted`
pseudo elements.

I'll add these missing features later as separate patches.

[1]: http://w3c.github.io/webcomponents/spec/shadow/
[2]:
https://github.com/w3c/webcomponents/blob/gh-pages/proposals/shadow-dom-v1-in...
[3]: https://github.com/w3c/webcomponents/issues/317

BUG=531990
==========

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2015-12-09 08:06:40]

The CQ bit was unchecked by commit-bot@chromium.org

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2015-12-09 08:06:41]

Dry run: Try jobs failed on following builders:
  linux_android_rel_ng on tryserver.chromium.linux (JOB_FAILED,
http://build.chromium.org/p/tryserver.chromium.linux/builders/linux_android_r...)

[hayato, 2015-12-09 08:13:05]

The CQ bit was checked by hayato@chromium.org to run a CQ dry run

[hayato, 2015-12-09 08:13:08]

update tests

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2015-12-09 08:13:36]

Dry run: CQ is trying da patch. Follow status at
 https://chromium-cq-status.appspot.com/patch-status/1489433002/120001
View timeline at
 https://chromium-cq-status.appspot.com/patch-timeline/1489433002/120001

[kochi, 2015-12-09 08:57:34]

First round of comments.

I haven't yet understood why new methods in
ComposedTreeTraversal is required and will
take a closer look.

https://codereview.chromium.org/1489433002/diff/100001/third_party/WebKit/Lay...
File third_party/WebKit/LayoutTests/fast/dom/shadow/event-pseudo.html (right):

https://codereview.chromium.org/1489433002/diff/100001/third_party/WebKit/Lay...
third_party/WebKit/LayoutTests/fast/dom/shadow/event-pseudo.html:8: <div
id="host"><canvas id="content"></canvas></div>
Can this be in a separate CL?

https://codereview.chromium.org/1489433002/diff/100001/third_party/WebKit/Sou...
File third_party/WebKit/Source/core/dom/Node.cpp (right):

https://codereview.chromium.org/1489433002/diff/100001/third_party/WebKit/Sou...
third_party/WebKit/Source/core/dom/Node.cpp:2219: if (shadow->isV1()) {
No {} for this if.

https://codereview.chromium.org/1489433002/diff/100001/third_party/WebKit/Sou...
File third_party/WebKit/Source/core/dom/shadow/ElementShadow.h (right):

https://codereview.chromium.org/1489433002/diff/100001/third_party/WebKit/Sou...
third_party/WebKit/Source/core/dom/shadow/ElementShadow.h:127: friend
std::ostream& operator<<(std::ostream&, const ElementShadow&);
Is this for debugging?

https://codereview.chromium.org/1489433002/diff/100001/third_party/WebKit/Sou...
File third_party/WebKit/Source/core/dom/shadow/SlotAssignment.cpp (right):

https://codereview.chromium.org/1489433002/diff/100001/third_party/WebKit/Sou...
third_party/WebKit/Source/core/dom/shadow/SlotAssignment.cpp:68: if
((name.isEmpty() || name.isNull()) && !defaultSlot) {
no {} for this if-else as each clause is one-liner.

https://codereview.chromium.org/1489433002/diff/100001/third_party/WebKit/Sou...
third_party/WebKit/Source/core/dom/shadow/SlotAssignment.cpp:84: if
(defaultSlot) {
No {} for this if-else.

https://codereview.chromium.org/1489433002/diff/100001/third_party/WebKit/Sou...
third_party/WebKit/Source/core/dom/shadow/SlotAssignment.cpp:91: if (slot) {
No {} for this if-else.

https://codereview.chromium.org/1489433002/diff/100001/third_party/WebKit/Sou...
third_party/WebKit/Source/core/dom/shadow/SlotAssignment.cpp:109: if
(isHTMLSlotElement(hostChild)) {
No {} for this if-else.

https://codereview.chromium.org/1489433002/diff/100001/third_party/WebKit/Sou...
File third_party/WebKit/Source/core/html/HTMLSlotElement.cpp (right):

https://codereview.chromium.org/1489433002/diff/100001/third_party/WebKit/Sou...
third_party/WebKit/Source/core/html/HTMLSlotElement.cpp:62: void
HTMLSlotElement::clearDistribution()
Not to mix distribution and assignment, do we need to split this into 2 methods?
i.e. for clearing V0 distribution and for clearing V1 slot assignment?

https://codereview.chromium.org/1489433002/diff/100001/third_party/WebKit/Sou...
File third_party/WebKit/Source/core/testing/Internals.cpp (right):

https://codereview.chromium.org/1489433002/diff/100001/third_party/WebKit/Sou...
third_party/WebKit/Source/core/testing/Internals.cpp:627: return nullptr;
nit: could you convert all other instances of "return 0;" in this file to
"return nullptr" in another CL?

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2015-12-09 09:35:25]

The CQ bit was unchecked by commit-bot@chromium.org

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2015-12-09 09:35:26]

Dry run: Try jobs failed on following builders:
  win_chromium_rel_ng on tryserver.chromium.win (JOB_FAILED,
http://build.chromium.org/p/tryserver.chromium.win/builders/win_chromium_rel_...)

[hayato, 2015-12-09 10:22:01]

The CQ bit was checked by hayato@chromium.org to run a CQ dry run

[hayato, 2015-12-09 10:22:05]

rebase webexposed/ tests. Addressed the comments

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2015-12-09 10:22:19]

Dry run: CQ is trying da patch. Follow status at
 https://chromium-cq-status.appspot.com/patch-status/1489433002/140001
View timeline at
 https://chromium-cq-status.appspot.com/patch-timeline/1489433002/140001

[hayato, 2015-12-09 10:25:40]

Thank you for the review.

> I haven't yet understood why new methods in
ComposedTreeTraversal is required and will
take a closer look.

All new methods are just called from existing methods in Composed Tree
Traversal, I think.

https://codereview.chromium.org/1489433002/diff/100001/third_party/WebKit/Lay...
File third_party/WebKit/LayoutTests/fast/dom/shadow/event-pseudo.html (right):

https://codereview.chromium.org/1489433002/diff/100001/third_party/WebKit/Lay...
third_party/WebKit/LayoutTests/fast/dom/shadow/event-pseudo.html:8: <div
id="host"><canvas id="content"></canvas></div>
On 2015/12/09 08:57:34, kochi wrote:
> Can this be in a separate CL?

Done.  This was unintentionally added.

https://codereview.chromium.org/1489433002/diff/100001/third_party/WebKit/Sou...
File third_party/WebKit/Source/core/dom/Node.cpp (right):

https://codereview.chromium.org/1489433002/diff/100001/third_party/WebKit/Sou...
third_party/WebKit/Source/core/dom/Node.cpp:2219: if (shadow->isV1()) {
On 2015/12/09 08:57:34, kochi wrote:
> No {} for this if.

Done.

https://codereview.chromium.org/1489433002/diff/100001/third_party/WebKit/Sou...
File third_party/WebKit/Source/core/dom/shadow/ElementShadow.h (right):

https://codereview.chromium.org/1489433002/diff/100001/third_party/WebKit/Sou...
third_party/WebKit/Source/core/dom/shadow/ElementShadow.h:127: friend
std::ostream& operator<<(std::ostream&, const ElementShadow&);
On 2015/12/09 08:57:34, kochi wrote:
> Is this for debugging?

Done. I forgot to remove it.

https://codereview.chromium.org/1489433002/diff/100001/third_party/WebKit/Sou...
File third_party/WebKit/Source/core/dom/shadow/SlotAssignment.cpp (right):

https://codereview.chromium.org/1489433002/diff/100001/third_party/WebKit/Sou...
third_party/WebKit/Source/core/dom/shadow/SlotAssignment.cpp:68: if
((name.isEmpty() || name.isNull()) && !defaultSlot) {
On 2015/12/09 08:57:34, kochi wrote:
> no {} for this if-else as each clause is one-liner.

Done. BTW, it's permitted according to blink style guide. :)

https://codereview.chromium.org/1489433002/diff/100001/third_party/WebKit/Sou...
third_party/WebKit/Source/core/dom/shadow/SlotAssignment.cpp:84: if
(defaultSlot) {
On 2015/12/09 08:57:34, kochi wrote:
> No {} for this if-else.

Done.

https://codereview.chromium.org/1489433002/diff/100001/third_party/WebKit/Sou...
third_party/WebKit/Source/core/dom/shadow/SlotAssignment.cpp:91: if (slot) {
On 2015/12/09 08:57:34, kochi wrote:
> No {} for this if-else.

Done.

https://codereview.chromium.org/1489433002/diff/100001/third_party/WebKit/Sou...
third_party/WebKit/Source/core/dom/shadow/SlotAssignment.cpp:109: if
(isHTMLSlotElement(hostChild)) {
On 2015/12/09 08:57:34, kochi wrote:
> No {} for this if-else.

Done.

https://codereview.chromium.org/1489433002/diff/100001/third_party/WebKit/Sou...
File third_party/WebKit/Source/core/html/HTMLSlotElement.cpp (right):

https://codereview.chromium.org/1489433002/diff/100001/third_party/WebKit/Sou...
third_party/WebKit/Source/core/html/HTMLSlotElement.cpp:62: void
HTMLSlotElement::clearDistribution()
On 2015/12/09 08:57:34, kochi wrote:
> Not to mix distribution and assignment, do we need to split this into 2
methods?
> i.e. for clearing V0 distribution and for clearing V1 slot assignment?

I don't think we need to split this. That's bad.  We do't need to expose two
concepts to callers. I'm afraid that's confusing and not robust.
It's an implementation detail how distribution information are saved in
SlotAssignment.

https://codereview.chromium.org/1489433002/diff/100001/third_party/WebKit/Sou...
File third_party/WebKit/Source/core/testing/Internals.cpp (right):

https://codereview.chromium.org/1489433002/diff/100001/third_party/WebKit/Sou...
third_party/WebKit/Source/core/testing/Internals.cpp:627: return nullptr;
On 2015/12/09 08:57:34, kochi wrote:
> nit: could you convert all other instances of "return 0;" in this file to
> "return nullptr" in another CL?

Acknowledged. That can be done later.

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2015-12-09 11:58:41]

The CQ bit was unchecked by commit-bot@chromium.org

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2015-12-09 11:58:42]

Dry run: This issue passed the CQ dry run.

[kochi, 2015-12-09 12:02:27]

Second round.  I haven't looked into layout tests.

https://codereview.chromium.org/1489433002/diff/140001/third_party/WebKit/Sou...
File third_party/WebKit/Source/core/dom/Node.cpp (right):

https://codereview.chromium.org/1489433002/diff/140001/third_party/WebKit/Sou...
third_party/WebKit/Source/core/dom/Node.cpp:2219: if (shadow->isV1())
You also need to check if this is an open shadow root.

https://w3c.github.io/webcomponents/spec/shadow/#widl-NonDocumentTypeChildNod...
> On getting, the attribute must return the assigned slot of the context
> object, if there is, and the assigned slot participates in an open shadow
tree.

https://codereview.chromium.org/1489433002/diff/140001/third_party/WebKit/Sou...
File third_party/WebKit/Source/core/dom/shadow/ComposedTreeTraversal.cpp
(right):

https://codereview.chromium.org/1489433002/diff/140001/third_party/WebKit/Sou...
third_party/WebKit/Source/core/dom/shadow/ComposedTreeTraversal.cpp:114: //
TODO(hayato): Fix for v1
Could you be more specific about what to be fixed?

https://codereview.chromium.org/1489433002/diff/140001/third_party/WebKit/Sou...
third_party/WebKit/Source/core/dom/shadow/ComposedTreeTraversal.cpp:154: static
ElementShadow* parentElementShadow(const Node& node)
nit: this function looks a part of Node::assignedSlot().
Can this be moved to some header file (ElementShadow.h?)?

[hayato, 2015-12-10 02:05:55]

Description was changed from

==========
Support the essential part of Shadow DOM v1

The essential part which this CL supports are:

- V1 shadow trees can be rendered correctly.
- Slot elements are no longer dummy elements. It works as the Shadow DOM spec
says [1].
- Composed Tree Traversal supports both v0 and v1 distribution.
- v0 and v1 shadow trees can co-exist in the same tree of trees

New APIs are:

- NonDocumentTypeChildNode.assignedSlot
- HTMLSlotElement.getAssingedNodes
- HTMLSlotElement.getDistributedNodes
- Element's slot attribute

All new APIs are guarded by `ShadowDOMV1` runtime flag.

The following features are not implemented:

- Event path for v1 shadow trees.
- The unified redistribution across v0 and v1 shadow trees. See [2] for details.
- The fallback contents of slot elements. See [3] for details
- Distribution algorithms for v1 shadow tree are not optimized yet. See TODOs in
this CL for details.
- All style related features which are specific to v1, such as `::slotted`
pseudo elements.

I'll add these missing features later as separate patches.

[1]: http://w3c.github.io/webcomponents/spec/shadow/
[2]:
https://github.com/w3c/webcomponents/blob/gh-pages/proposals/shadow-dom-v1-in...
[3]: https://github.com/w3c/webcomponents/issues/317

BUG=531990
==========

to

==========
Support the essential part of Shadow DOM v1

The essential part which this CL supports are:

- V1 shadow trees can be rendered correctly.
- Slot elements are no longer dummy elements. It works as the Shadow DOM spec
says [1].
- Composed Tree Traversal supports both v0 and v1 distribution.
- v0 and v1 shadow trees can co-exist in the same tree of trees

New APIs are:

- NonDocumentTypeChildNode.assignedSlot
- HTMLSlotElement.getAssingedNodes
- HTMLSlotElement.getDistributedNodes
- Element's slot attribute

All new APIs are guarded by `ShadowDOMV1` runtime flag.

The following features are not implemented:

- Event path for v1 shadow trees.
- The unified redistribution across v0 and v1 shadow trees. See [2] for details.
- The fallback contents of slot elements. See [3] for details
- Distribution algorithms for v1 shadow tree are not optimized yet. See TODOs in
this CL for details.
- All style related features which are specific to v1, such as `::slotted`
pseudo elements.
- Support a closed shadow trees of v1.

I'll add these missing features later as separate patches.

[1]: http://w3c.github.io/webcomponents/spec/shadow/
[2]:
https://github.com/w3c/webcomponents/blob/gh-pages/proposals/shadow-dom-v1-in...
[3]: https://github.com/w3c/webcomponents/issues/317

BUG=531990
==========

[hayato, 2015-12-10 02:14:18]

Description was changed from

==========
Support the essential part of Shadow DOM v1

The essential part which this CL supports are:

- V1 shadow trees can be rendered correctly.
- Slot elements are no longer dummy elements. It works as the Shadow DOM spec
says [1].
- Composed Tree Traversal supports both v0 and v1 distribution.
- v0 and v1 shadow trees can co-exist in the same tree of trees

New APIs are:

- NonDocumentTypeChildNode.assignedSlot
- HTMLSlotElement.getAssingedNodes
- HTMLSlotElement.getDistributedNodes
- Element's slot attribute

All new APIs are guarded by `ShadowDOMV1` runtime flag.

The following features are not implemented:

- Event path for v1 shadow trees.
- The unified redistribution across v0 and v1 shadow trees. See [2] for details.
- The fallback contents of slot elements. See [3] for details
- Distribution algorithms for v1 shadow tree are not optimized yet. See TODOs in
this CL for details.
- All style related features which are specific to v1, such as `::slotted`
pseudo elements.
- Support a closed shadow trees of v1.

I'll add these missing features later as separate patches.

[1]: http://w3c.github.io/webcomponents/spec/shadow/
[2]:
https://github.com/w3c/webcomponents/blob/gh-pages/proposals/shadow-dom-v1-in...
[3]: https://github.com/w3c/webcomponents/issues/317

BUG=531990
==========

to

==========
Support the essential part of Shadow DOM v1

The essential part which this CL supports are:

- V1 shadow trees can be rendered correctly.
- Slot elements are no longer dummy elements. It works as the Shadow DOM spec
says [1].
- Composed Tree Traversal supports both v0 and v1 distribution.
- v0 and v1 shadow trees can co-exist in the same tree of trees

New APIs are:

- NonDocumentTypeChildNode.assignedSlot
- HTMLSlotElement.getAssingedNodes
- HTMLSlotElement.getDistributedNodes
- Element's slot attribute

All new APIs are guarded by `ShadowDOMV1` runtime flag.

The following features are not implemented:

- Event path for v1 shadow trees.
- The unified redistribution across v0 and v1 shadow trees. See [2] for details.
- The fallback contents of slot elements. See [3] for details
- Distribution algorithms for v1 shadow tree are not optimized yet. See TODOs in
this CL for details.
- All style related features which are specific to v1, such as `::slotted`
pseudo elements.
- Closed shadow trees of v1 are not considered yet.

I'll add these missing features later as separate patches.

[1]: http://w3c.github.io/webcomponents/spec/shadow/
[2]:
https://github.com/w3c/webcomponents/blob/gh-pages/proposals/shadow-dom-v1-in...
[3]: https://github.com/w3c/webcomponents/issues/317

BUG=531990
==========

[hayato, 2015-12-10 02:16:37]

The CQ bit was checked by hayato@chromium.org to run a CQ dry run

[hayato, 2015-12-10 02:16:39]

Remove one TODO

[hayato, 2015-12-10 02:17:31]

Thank you for the review.

https://codereview.chromium.org/1489433002/diff/140001/third_party/WebKit/Sou...
File third_party/WebKit/Source/core/dom/Node.cpp (right):

https://codereview.chromium.org/1489433002/diff/140001/third_party/WebKit/Sou...
third_party/WebKit/Source/core/dom/Node.cpp:2219: if (shadow->isV1())
On 2015/12/09 12:02:27, kochi wrote:
> You also need to check if this is an open shadow root.
> 
>
https://w3c.github.io/webcomponents/spec/shadow/#widl-NonDocumentTypeChildNod...
> > On getting, the attribute must return the assigned slot of the context
> > object, if there is, and the assigned slot participates in an open shadow
> tree. 

Let me address a closed shadow tree in another patch to isolate a concern.
I've updated the description of this CL.

https://codereview.chromium.org/1489433002/diff/140001/third_party/WebKit/Sou...
File third_party/WebKit/Source/core/dom/shadow/ComposedTreeTraversal.cpp
(right):

https://codereview.chromium.org/1489433002/diff/140001/third_party/WebKit/Sou...
third_party/WebKit/Source/core/dom/shadow/ComposedTreeTraversal.cpp:114: //
TODO(hayato): Fix for v1
On 2015/12/09 12:02:27, kochi wrote:
> Could you be more specific about what to be fixed?

Done. I've removed this.

https://codereview.chromium.org/1489433002/diff/140001/third_party/WebKit/Sou...
third_party/WebKit/Source/core/dom/shadow/ComposedTreeTraversal.cpp:154: static
ElementShadow* parentElementShadow(const Node& node)
On 2015/12/09 12:02:27, kochi wrote:
> nit: this function looks a part of Node::assignedSlot().
> Can this be moved to some header file (ElementShadow.h?)?

This function is too specific to the file. Let me keep this function as a file
scope static function unless we want to use this function in other places.

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2015-12-10 02:17:40]

Dry run: CQ is trying da patch. Follow status at
 https://chromium-cq-status.appspot.com/patch-status/1489433002/160001
View timeline at
 https://chromium-cq-status.appspot.com/patch-timeline/1489433002/160001

[tkent, 2015-12-10 04:23:02]

https://codereview.chromium.org/1489433002/diff/160001/third_party/WebKit/Lay...
File
third_party/WebKit/LayoutTests/fast/dom/shadow/v1-composed-tree-traversal-1.html
(right):

https://codereview.chromium.org/1489433002/diff/160001/third_party/WebKit/Lay...
third_party/WebKit/LayoutTests/fast/dom/shadow/v1-composed-tree-traversal-1.html:27:
assert_equals(internals.nextInComposedTree(child1), child2);
C++ unit test is more suitable because this is not a test for Web-exposed
feature.

https://codereview.chromium.org/1489433002/diff/160001/third_party/WebKit/Lay...
File
third_party/WebKit/LayoutTests/fast/dom/shadow/v1-composed-tree-traversal-2.html
(right):

https://codereview.chromium.org/1489433002/diff/160001/third_party/WebKit/Lay...
third_party/WebKit/LayoutTests/fast/dom/shadow/v1-composed-tree-traversal-2.html:49:
assert_equals(internals.nextInComposedTree(d1), d1_1);
C++ unit test is more suitable.

https://codereview.chromium.org/1489433002/diff/160001/third_party/WebKit/Sou...
File third_party/WebKit/Source/core/dom/shadow/SlotAssignment.cpp (right):

https://codereview.chromium.org/1489433002/diff/160001/third_party/WebKit/Sou...
third_party/WebKit/Source/core/dom/shadow/SlotAssignment.cpp:1: /*
Use the 3-line header.

https://codereview.chromium.org/1489433002/diff/160001/third_party/WebKit/Sou...
third_party/WebKit/Source/core/dom/shadow/SlotAssignment.cpp:32: 
Remove a blank line

https://codereview.chromium.org/1489433002/diff/160001/third_party/WebKit/Sou...
File third_party/WebKit/Source/core/dom/shadow/SlotAssignment.h (right):

https://codereview.chromium.org/1489433002/diff/160001/third_party/WebKit/Sou...
third_party/WebKit/Source/core/dom/shadow/SlotAssignment.h:1: /*
Use the 3-line header.

https://codereview.chromium.org/1489433002/diff/160001/third_party/WebKit/Sou...
File third_party/WebKit/Source/core/html/HTMLSlotElement.cpp (right):

https://codereview.chromium.org/1489433002/diff/160001/third_party/WebKit/Sou...
third_party/WebKit/Source/core/html/HTMLSlotElement.cpp:86: for (size_t i = 0; i
< m_distributedNodes.size(); ++i) {
for (auto& node : m_distributedNodes) {
    if (node->needsAttach())...

is simpler.

https://codereview.chromium.org/1489433002/diff/160001/third_party/WebKit/Sou...
third_party/WebKit/Source/core/html/HTMLSlotElement.cpp:96: for (size_t i = 0; i
< m_distributedNodes.size(); ++i)
Ditto.

https://codereview.chromium.org/1489433002/diff/160001/third_party/WebKit/Sou...
third_party/WebKit/Source/core/html/HTMLSlotElement.cpp:104:
HTMLElement::trace(visitor);
Need to trace m_assingedNodes and m_distributedNodes.

https://codereview.chromium.org/1489433002/diff/160001/third_party/WebKit/Sou...
File third_party/WebKit/Source/core/html/HTMLSlotElement.h (right):

https://codereview.chromium.org/1489433002/diff/160001/third_party/WebKit/Sou...
third_party/WebKit/Source/core/html/HTMLSlotElement.h:57: void
appendDistributedNodes(const Vector<RefPtr<Node>>&);
WillBeHeapVector<RefPtrWillBeMember<node>>

[kochi, 2015-12-10 05:57:23]

Reviewed layout tests.

https://codereview.chromium.org/1489433002/diff/160001/third_party/WebKit/Lay...
File third_party/WebKit/LayoutTests/fast/dom/shadow/v1-slots-api-1.html (right):

https://codereview.chromium.org/1489433002/diff/160001/third_party/WebKit/Lay...
third_party/WebKit/LayoutTests/fast/dom/shadow/v1-slots-api-1.html:45: </script>
Could you also add a test case which has default slot <slot></slot> and
all children of shadow host without "name" attribute is assigned there
(maybe 2 <slot></slot>s, and the default slot should be the first one).

https://codereview.chromium.org/1489433002/diff/160001/third_party/WebKit/Lay...
File third_party/WebKit/LayoutTests/fast/dom/shadow/v1-slots-text-nodes.html
(right):

https://codereview.chromium.org/1489433002/diff/160001/third_party/WebKit/Lay...
third_party/WebKit/LayoutTests/fast/dom/shadow/v1-slots-text-nodes.html:33:
assert_equals(textHello.nodeValue.trim(), 'Hello');
I prefer not to use trim() here, and write the HTML explicitly to avoid
surrounding whitespaces,
like </div>Hello<div id='child2>... or write the test pattern as '   Hello\n' to
avoid any ambiguity.

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2015-12-10 07:35:24]

The CQ bit was unchecked by commit-bot@chromium.org

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2015-12-10 07:35:25]

Dry run: This issue passed the CQ dry run.

[hayato, 2015-12-10 08:10:21]

The CQ bit was checked by hayato@chromium.org to run a CQ dry run

[hayato, 2015-12-10 08:10:26]

Added unit tests. Fixed a minor bug in distribution.

[hayato, 2015-12-10 08:11:21]

Thank you for the reviews.

https://codereview.chromium.org/1489433002/diff/160001/third_party/WebKit/Lay...
File
third_party/WebKit/LayoutTests/fast/dom/shadow/v1-composed-tree-traversal-1.html
(right):

https://codereview.chromium.org/1489433002/diff/160001/third_party/WebKit/Lay...
third_party/WebKit/LayoutTests/fast/dom/shadow/v1-composed-tree-traversal-1.html:27:
assert_equals(internals.nextInComposedTree(child1), child2);
On 2015/12/10 04:23:02, tkent wrote:
> C++ unit test is more suitable because this is not a test for Web-exposed
> feature.

Done. Removed these tests and updated ComposedTreeTraversalTest.cpp.

https://codereview.chromium.org/1489433002/diff/160001/third_party/WebKit/Lay...
File third_party/WebKit/LayoutTests/fast/dom/shadow/v1-slots-api-1.html (right):

https://codereview.chromium.org/1489433002/diff/160001/third_party/WebKit/Lay...
third_party/WebKit/LayoutTests/fast/dom/shadow/v1-slots-api-1.html:45: </script>
On 2015/12/10 05:57:23, kochi wrote:
> Could you also add a test case which has default slot <slot></slot> and
> all children of shadow host without "name" attribute is assigned there
> (maybe 2 <slot></slot>s, and the default slot should be the first one).

Done. Added v1-default-slots.html test.

https://codereview.chromium.org/1489433002/diff/160001/third_party/WebKit/Lay...
File third_party/WebKit/LayoutTests/fast/dom/shadow/v1-slots-text-nodes.html
(right):

https://codereview.chromium.org/1489433002/diff/160001/third_party/WebKit/Lay...
third_party/WebKit/LayoutTests/fast/dom/shadow/v1-slots-text-nodes.html:33:
assert_equals(textHello.nodeValue.trim(), 'Hello');
On 2015/12/10 05:57:23, kochi wrote:
> I prefer not to use trim() here, and write the HTML explicitly to avoid
> surrounding whitespaces,
> like </div>Hello<div id='child2>... or write the test pattern as '   Hello\n'
to
> avoid any ambiguity.
> 

I don't think that's worth while. Using trim() is good enough here to verify the
node is an expected text node. The exact node value does not matter here.

https://codereview.chromium.org/1489433002/diff/160001/third_party/WebKit/Sou...
File third_party/WebKit/Source/core/dom/shadow/SlotAssignment.cpp (right):

https://codereview.chromium.org/1489433002/diff/160001/third_party/WebKit/Sou...
third_party/WebKit/Source/core/dom/shadow/SlotAssignment.cpp:1: /*
On 2015/12/10 04:23:02, tkent wrote:
> Use the 3-line header.

Done.

https://codereview.chromium.org/1489433002/diff/160001/third_party/WebKit/Sou...
third_party/WebKit/Source/core/dom/shadow/SlotAssignment.cpp:32: 
On 2015/12/10 04:23:02, tkent wrote:
> Remove a blank line

Done.

https://codereview.chromium.org/1489433002/diff/160001/third_party/WebKit/Sou...
File third_party/WebKit/Source/core/html/HTMLSlotElement.cpp (right):

https://codereview.chromium.org/1489433002/diff/160001/third_party/WebKit/Sou...
third_party/WebKit/Source/core/html/HTMLSlotElement.cpp:86: for (size_t i = 0; i
< m_distributedNodes.size(); ++i) {
On 2015/12/10 04:23:02, tkent wrote:
> for (auto& node : m_distributedNodes) {
>     if (node->needsAttach())...
> 
> is simpler.

Done.

https://codereview.chromium.org/1489433002/diff/160001/third_party/WebKit/Sou...
third_party/WebKit/Source/core/html/HTMLSlotElement.cpp:96: for (size_t i = 0; i
< m_distributedNodes.size(); ++i)
On 2015/12/10 04:23:02, tkent wrote:
> Ditto.

Done.

https://codereview.chromium.org/1489433002/diff/160001/third_party/WebKit/Sou...
third_party/WebKit/Source/core/html/HTMLSlotElement.cpp:104:
HTMLElement::trace(visitor);
On 2015/12/10 04:23:02, tkent wrote:
> Need to trace m_assingedNodes and m_distributedNodes.

Done.

https://codereview.chromium.org/1489433002/diff/160001/third_party/WebKit/Sou...
File third_party/WebKit/Source/core/html/HTMLSlotElement.h (right):

https://codereview.chromium.org/1489433002/diff/160001/third_party/WebKit/Sou...
third_party/WebKit/Source/core/html/HTMLSlotElement.h:57: void
appendDistributedNodes(const Vector<RefPtr<Node>>&);
On 2015/12/10 04:23:02, tkent wrote:
> WillBeHeapVector<RefPtrWillBeMember<node>>

Done.

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2015-12-10 08:11:33]

Dry run: CQ is trying da patch. Follow status at
 https://chromium-cq-status.appspot.com/patch-status/1489433002/180001
View timeline at
 https://chromium-cq-status.appspot.com/patch-timeline/1489433002/180001

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2015-12-10 11:51:10]

The CQ bit was unchecked by commit-bot@chromium.org

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2015-12-10 11:51:11]

Dry run: This issue passed the CQ dry run.

[tkent, 2015-12-11 01:00:47]

https://codereview.chromium.org/1489433002/diff/180001/third_party/WebKit/Sou...
File third_party/WebKit/Source/core/dom/shadow/SlotAssignment.h (right):

https://codereview.chromium.org/1489433002/diff/180001/third_party/WebKit/Sou...
third_party/WebKit/Source/core/dom/shadow/SlotAssignment.h:1: /*
Use the 3-line header.

[hayato, 2015-12-11 02:04:32]

The CQ bit was checked by hayato@chromium.org to run a CQ dry run

[hayato, 2015-12-11 02:04:36]

Use the 3-line header

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2015-12-11 02:05:36]

Dry run: CQ is trying da patch. Follow status at
 https://chromium-cq-status.appspot.com/patch-status/1489433002/200001
View timeline at
 https://chromium-cq-status.appspot.com/patch-timeline/1489433002/200001

[hayato, 2015-12-11 02:10:29]

https://codereview.chromium.org/1489433002/diff/180001/third_party/WebKit/Sou...
File third_party/WebKit/Source/core/dom/shadow/SlotAssignment.h (right):

https://codereview.chromium.org/1489433002/diff/180001/third_party/WebKit/Sou...
third_party/WebKit/Source/core/dom/shadow/SlotAssignment.h:1: /*
On 2015/12/11 01:00:47, tkent wrote:
> Use the 3-line header.

Done.

[kochi, 2015-12-11 04:46:08]

lgtm

Thanks for clarifying the CL description for missing
parts for V1.

[tkent, 2015-12-11 04:49:37]

lgtm

https://codereview.chromium.org/1489433002/diff/200001/third_party/WebKit/Sou...
File third_party/WebKit/Source/core/testing/Internals.idl (right):

https://codereview.chromium.org/1489433002/diff/200001/third_party/WebKit/Sou...
third_party/WebKit/Source/core/testing/Internals.idl:90: [RaisesException] Node
parentInComposedTree(Node node);
Is this used now?

[hayato, 2015-12-11 04:51:08]

https://codereview.chromium.org/1489433002/diff/200001/third_party/WebKit/Sou...
File third_party/WebKit/Source/core/testing/Internals.idl (right):

https://codereview.chromium.org/1489433002/diff/200001/third_party/WebKit/Sou...
third_party/WebKit/Source/core/testing/Internals.idl:90: [RaisesException] Node
parentInComposedTree(Node node);
On 2015/12/11 04:49:37, tkent wrote:
> Is this used now?

Good point. Let me remove this before landing this CL.

[hayato, 2015-12-11 04:55:47]

The CQ bit was checked by hayato@chromium.org to run a CQ dry run

[hayato, 2015-12-11 04:55:51]

Revert Internals.*

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2015-12-11 04:56:44]

Dry run: CQ is trying da patch. Follow status at
 https://chromium-cq-status.appspot.com/patch-status/1489433002/220001
View timeline at
 https://chromium-cq-status.appspot.com/patch-timeline/1489433002/220001

[hayato, 2015-12-11 04:57:11]

The CQ bit was unchecked by hayato@chromium.org

[hayato, 2015-12-11 04:57:12]

The CQ bit was checked by hayato@chromium.org

[hayato, 2015-12-11 04:57:13]

The patchset sent to the CQ was uploaded after l-g-t-m from tkent@chromium.org,
kochi@chromium.org
Link to the patchset: https://codereview.chromium.org/1489433002/#ps220001
(title: "Revert Internals.*")

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2015-12-11 04:58:13]

CQ is trying da patch. Follow status at
 https://chromium-cq-status.appspot.com/patch-status/1489433002/220001
View timeline at
 https://chromium-cq-status.appspot.com/patch-timeline/1489433002/220001

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2015-12-11 08:12:48]

The CQ bit was unchecked by commit-bot@chromium.org

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2015-12-11 08:12:49]

Try jobs failed on following builders:
  win_chromium_rel_ng on tryserver.chromium.win (JOB_FAILED,
http://build.chromium.org/p/tryserver.chromium.win/builders/win_chromium_rel_...)

[hayato, 2015-12-11 08:13:23]

The CQ bit was checked by hayato@chromium.org

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2015-12-11 08:13:57]

CQ is trying da patch. Follow status at
 https://chromium-cq-status.appspot.com/patch-status/1489433002/220001
View timeline at
 https://chromium-cq-status.appspot.com/patch-timeline/1489433002/220001

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2015-12-11 10:24:56]

Description was changed from

==========
Support the essential part of Shadow DOM v1

The essential part which this CL supports are:

- V1 shadow trees can be rendered correctly.
- Slot elements are no longer dummy elements. It works as the Shadow DOM spec
says [1].
- Composed Tree Traversal supports both v0 and v1 distribution.
- v0 and v1 shadow trees can co-exist in the same tree of trees

New APIs are:

- NonDocumentTypeChildNode.assignedSlot
- HTMLSlotElement.getAssingedNodes
- HTMLSlotElement.getDistributedNodes
- Element's slot attribute

All new APIs are guarded by `ShadowDOMV1` runtime flag.

The following features are not implemented:

- Event path for v1 shadow trees.
- The unified redistribution across v0 and v1 shadow trees. See [2] for details.
- The fallback contents of slot elements. See [3] for details
- Distribution algorithms for v1 shadow tree are not optimized yet. See TODOs in
this CL for details.
- All style related features which are specific to v1, such as `::slotted`
pseudo elements.
- Closed shadow trees of v1 are not considered yet.

I'll add these missing features later as separate patches.

[1]: http://w3c.github.io/webcomponents/spec/shadow/
[2]:
https://github.com/w3c/webcomponents/blob/gh-pages/proposals/shadow-dom-v1-in...
[3]: https://github.com/w3c/webcomponents/issues/317

BUG=531990
==========

to

==========
Support the essential part of Shadow DOM v1

The essential part which this CL supports are:

- V1 shadow trees can be rendered correctly.
- Slot elements are no longer dummy elements. It works as the Shadow DOM spec
says [1].
- Composed Tree Traversal supports both v0 and v1 distribution.
- v0 and v1 shadow trees can co-exist in the same tree of trees

New APIs are:

- NonDocumentTypeChildNode.assignedSlot
- HTMLSlotElement.getAssingedNodes
- HTMLSlotElement.getDistributedNodes
- Element's slot attribute

All new APIs are guarded by `ShadowDOMV1` runtime flag.

The following features are not implemented:

- Event path for v1 shadow trees.
- The unified redistribution across v0 and v1 shadow trees. See [2] for details.
- The fallback contents of slot elements. See [3] for details
- Distribution algorithms for v1 shadow tree are not optimized yet. See TODOs in
this CL for details.
- All style related features which are specific to v1, such as `::slotted`
pseudo elements.
- Closed shadow trees of v1 are not considered yet.

I'll add these missing features later as separate patches.

[1]: http://w3c.github.io/webcomponents/spec/shadow/
[2]:
https://github.com/w3c/webcomponents/blob/gh-pages/proposals/shadow-dom-v1-in...
[3]: https://github.com/w3c/webcomponents/issues/317

BUG=531990
==========

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2015-12-11 10:24:57]

Committed patchset #12 (id:220001)

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2015-12-11 10:25:58]

Description was changed from

==========
Support the essential part of Shadow DOM v1

The essential part which this CL supports are:

- V1 shadow trees can be rendered correctly.
- Slot elements are no longer dummy elements. It works as the Shadow DOM spec
says [1].
- Composed Tree Traversal supports both v0 and v1 distribution.
- v0 and v1 shadow trees can co-exist in the same tree of trees

New APIs are:

- NonDocumentTypeChildNode.assignedSlot
- HTMLSlotElement.getAssingedNodes
- HTMLSlotElement.getDistributedNodes
- Element's slot attribute

All new APIs are guarded by `ShadowDOMV1` runtime flag.

The following features are not implemented:

- Event path for v1 shadow trees.
- The unified redistribution across v0 and v1 shadow trees. See [2] for details.
- The fallback contents of slot elements. See [3] for details
- Distribution algorithms for v1 shadow tree are not optimized yet. See TODOs in
this CL for details.
- All style related features which are specific to v1, such as `::slotted`
pseudo elements.
- Closed shadow trees of v1 are not considered yet.

I'll add these missing features later as separate patches.

[1]: http://w3c.github.io/webcomponents/spec/shadow/
[2]:
https://github.com/w3c/webcomponents/blob/gh-pages/proposals/shadow-dom-v1-in...
[3]: https://github.com/w3c/webcomponents/issues/317

BUG=531990
==========

to

==========
Support the essential part of Shadow DOM v1

The essential part which this CL supports are:

- V1 shadow trees can be rendered correctly.
- Slot elements are no longer dummy elements. It works as the Shadow DOM spec
says [1].
- Composed Tree Traversal supports both v0 and v1 distribution.
- v0 and v1 shadow trees can co-exist in the same tree of trees

New APIs are:

- NonDocumentTypeChildNode.assignedSlot
- HTMLSlotElement.getAssingedNodes
- HTMLSlotElement.getDistributedNodes
- Element's slot attribute

All new APIs are guarded by `ShadowDOMV1` runtime flag.

The following features are not implemented:

- Event path for v1 shadow trees.
- The unified redistribution across v0 and v1 shadow trees. See [2] for details.
- The fallback contents of slot elements. See [3] for details
- Distribution algorithms for v1 shadow tree are not optimized yet. See TODOs in
this CL for details.
- All style related features which are specific to v1, such as `::slotted`
pseudo elements.
- Closed shadow trees of v1 are not considered yet.

I'll add these missing features later as separate patches.

[1]: http://w3c.github.io/webcomponents/spec/shadow/
[2]:
https://github.com/w3c/webcomponents/blob/gh-pages/proposals/shadow-dom-v1-in...
[3]: https://github.com/w3c/webcomponents/issues/317

BUG=531990

Committed: https://crrev.com/071137e656e1ad78c5e8ce506346aa5d2eeef5f9
Cr-Commit-Position: refs/heads/master@{#364654}
==========

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2015-12-11 10:26:00]

Patchset 12 (id:??) landed as
https://crrev.com/071137e656e1ad78c5e8ce506346aa5d2eeef5f9
Cr-Commit-Position: refs/heads/master@{#364654}