2 ms·
> But they won't, for the reasons presented here. They solve only the lower half of the problem. Right, I wasn't arguing for use of web components for anything
by TimTheTinker 7y ago
> But they won't, for the reasons presented here. They solve only the lower half of the problem.
Right, I wasn't arguing for use of web components for anything like <BlogArticle>. That's way outside their scope. But with web components being available, libraries like React would be optional/redundant when custom components are involved (like in complex web apps).
But I still think it would be fun to see someone hack modern web tech (even web components) to build modern blog features with pure HTML (+ sprinkled JS/CSS, as needed).
- ricardobeat 7y ago> libraries like React would be optional/redundant when custom components are involved (like in complex web apps) This is where we disagree - this is not true at all. In complex web apps, what you need the most is high-level components such as `<BlogArticle>` that allow you to tame complexity, isolate reusable pieces of UI that might be as large as a page itself, and not just localized elements. As you acknowledge, WC doesn't even aspire to fill this role, meaning you'll still need higher level frameworks on top of them, which significantly diminishes the value of being built-in.
- TimTheTinker 7y agoHave you ever tried to build a reusable multi-select combo box? That’s not easy without some framework. Event and state management can become a real headache. But higher-level items like articles/comments are so much easier without a framework - I just don’t see how React/etc. is necessary given you have a decent templating library and a module loader that has CSS, JSON, and string plugins.