Tab Atkins Jr.
Tab Atkins Jr.
An exported definition doesn't necessarily need to be *referenced again* in the defining spec; as you say, things like method arguments don't necessarily need to be talked about. So Bikeshed...
> I tried inserting an `export` attribute on the `` but that didn't seem to help. This sounds like a bug, tho. I'll investigate.
The phrasing is a little odd, but it's talking about what *transformations* you can perform without changing the resulting DOM (and which ones you can't, because it would result in...
I'm not a big of this "two lists" idea - it makes ordering less obvious (no longer order-of-appearance, but two simultaneously-calculated orders of appearance), and it brings up identity questions...
No, the point is that, because the initial layer is *explicitly* named, it's *not* implicitly removed from the layer stack.
I suppose that would be the implication, sure?
Okay, so initial wouldn't be a "layer", per se, just an indicator of whether a given (top-level?) layer is in the "before unlayered" or "after unlayered" lists. I still don't...
> So I'd be ok with "initial is just a reserved layer name" – but not if that behavior is restricted to the root layer. Allowing it to be nested...
All right, yes, I'm in favor of that. Simple and understandable, +1.
> My concern here is that a layer (whether named or anonymous) that is not accounted for in the first statement that mentions initial has no way to pull itself...