A bug similar to Bug 88495 contains.
Element::removedFrom has the same thing. Why taking the treeScope of parent? I believe node->treeScope() and parentNode()->treeScope() should be the same unless parentNode() does not exist...
It seems HTMLElement::removedFrom has similar pattern. I'm not sure we can remove it, but let me try.
Sorry, not HTMLElement but Element.
Created attachment 149566 [details] Patch
let me try to use EWS to check this patch does not degrade any tests...
Comment on attachment 149566 [details] Patch Attachment 149566 [details] did not pass chromium-ews (chromium-xvfb): Output: http://queues.webkit.org/results/13102466 New failing tests: fast/dom/shadow/get-element-by-id-in-shadow-mutation.html
Created attachment 149585 [details] Archive of layout-test-results from ec2-cr-linux-04 The attached test failures were seen while running run-webkit-tests on the chromium-ews. Bot: ec2-cr-linux-04 Port: <class 'webkitpy.common.config.ports.ChromiumXVFBPort'> Platform: Linux-2.6.35-28-virtual-x86_64-with-Ubuntu-10.10-maverick
(In reply to comment #7) > Created an attachment (id=149585) [details] > Archive of layout-test-results from ec2-cr-linux-04 > > The attached test failures were seen while running run-webkit-tests on the chromium-ews. > Bot: ec2-cr-linux-04 Port: <class 'webkitpy.common.config.ports.ChromiumXVFBPort'> Platform: Linux-2.6.35-28-virtual-x86_64-with-Ubuntu-10.10-maverick Oops...
By the way, why don't we just take insertionPoint->treeScope() only? Let me try to do it.
Ah, Element::removedFrom maybe seems OK, because it gets treeScope() and does not get shadowRoot().
Created attachment 149614 [details] Patch
Comment on attachment 149614 [details] Patch Clearing flags on attachment: 149614 Committed r121344: <http://trac.webkit.org/changeset/121344>
All reviewed patches have been landed. Closing bug.