refactor: establish DOMNodes folder feature

[jderochervlk]

Tracking issue: #342

Stack context

Part 16 of the Option 5 folder-feature stack.

• Previous: refactor: establish CSSOM folder feature #325
• Next: the HTML folder layer

Review this PR as the incremental diff against #325.

Summary

• add the target src/dom-nodes folder on the unqualified internal DOMNodes feature
• move the recursive node/tree, range, traversal, selection, element, and DOM implementation interfaces out of the legacy broad DOM folder
• move the small HTML.res shadow-root/serialization options module with its direct Element and ShadowRoot consumers
• add the supported WebAPI.DOMNodes feature
• expose the previously internal AbstractRange, Attr, CDATASection, ProcessingInstruction, and StaticRange interface modules

Dependency direction

The compiler-derived closure is:

WebAPI.DOMNodes -> WebAPI.DOMPlatform + WebAPI.Animation + WebAPI.CSSOM + WebAPI.Geometry + DOMNodes

Animation and CSSOM are required by public Element, ShadowRoot, ProcessingInstruction, and recursive DOMTree signatures. Keeping those dependencies explicit avoids module slices and produces an acyclic graph.

Temporary state

• the qualified WebAPI.DOM source-feature collision remains until the legacy DOM folder is fully emptied
• several node records still refer to foundational DOM.* compatibility types; final type ownership cleanup remains deferred
• HTML.res is intentionally owned by DOMNodes because its option types are required there; the later HTML feature receives it transitively

Review focus

• recursive DOMNodes folder membership and public interface completeness
• the measured dependency closure
• the placement of shared HTML serialization/shadow-root options

Verification

• node_modules/.bin/rescript clean
• node_modules/.bin/rescript build --prod --features DOM,Event,DOMPlatform,Animation,CSSOM,Geometry,DOMNodes
• npm run build
• npm test
• npm run format:check
• git diff --check

[jderochervlk]

@codex

[chatgpt-codex-connector]

💡 Codex Review

Here are some automated review suggestions for this pull request.

Reviewed commit: 8b79918593

ℹ️ About Codex in GitHub

Your team has set up Codex to review pull requests in this repo. Reviews are triggered when you

• Open a pull request for review
• Mark a draft as ready
• Comment "@codex review".

If Codex has suggestions, it will comment; otherwise it will react with 👍.

Codex can also answer questions or update the PR. Try commenting "@codex address that feedback".