3 ms·
Kind of expected more from "maximalist", like tons of components. It seems well-rounded though, to cover common needs. To nitpick for feedback: - I'd prefer m
by lioeters 6y ago
Kind of expected more from "maximalist", like tons of components. It seems well-rounded though, to cover common needs.
To nitpick for feedback:
- I'd prefer more spacing for headers, labels, input fields
- The checkbox and its label might look better if they aligned perfectly with radio inputs.
- Clicking on checkbox label changes the selection, but it doesn't with radio labels.
- Clicking on range input makes the whole thing go down a pixel or two. That effect looks OK on buttons, but not for range (in my opinion).
- swlkr 6y agoYeah the spacing needs some work. Good point about the range, the whole thing moving down doesn't make sense
- petepete 6y agoRadios doesn't work because despite the label wrapping the input, the 'for' attribute points to a id that doesn't exist.
- swlkr 6y agoNice catch, should be fixed shortly
- tootie 6y agoYeah, I'd expect maximalist to be heavyweight and complex. It seems to be an unsatisfied niche with so many minimalist systems out there. There's loads of applications out there for which there's a captive audience of enterprise users who don't mind waiting an extra 3-4s to load scripts if they'll provide better function.
- lioeters 6y agoWhat comes to mind as an example of "maximalist" approach is Ant Design. https://ant.design/components/overview/ https://ant.design/components/overview/ Very impressive framework, lots of well-made components, totally ready for enterprise use. When I experimented with it briefly, though, it seemed pretty heavy, and I wasn't able to just use a small part of it without bringing in a whole jungle.