3 ms·
Can you elaborate on how web components are ‘not a web standard so much as it is a Google standard’? Every major browser supports web components at this point.
by 40four 6y ago
Can you elaborate on how web components are ‘not a web standard so much as it is a Google standard’?
Every major browser supports web components at this point. Purportedly it’s a ‘Google’ standard & Mozilla & Microsoft are only supporting it because it serves them as mega corps?
Why do you consider it ‘not good for humans or the existing web’?
Anyone and everyone who wants to can write web components, and they will work in all major browsers. No dependencies, No libraries, no 3rd party APIs. Just vanilla HTML, JS & CSS.
To me that seems like a great advance for regular humans. We can develop ‘complex’ JS components with existing web tech. No build step, no learning 3rd party libraries.
- superkuh 6y agoWhen you make a website with web components you are subscribing to the model of a webpage as an executable application modifying the DOM rather than an HTML text document(1). One example of where this goes wrong is if, say, you wanted to implement the indieweb protocols for p2p social networking. With webmentions it's a bit like pingback, but instead of just HTTP POST, the pinger has to have a link on his webpage linking to the pingee's URL. That means the pingee webmention implementation has to be able to parse a page and get the html. With webcomponents doing DOM stuff instead of having HTML text that webmentions implemention (and everything else) has to become really complex instead of a simple curl and parsing text. (1) recent whatwg html standards say this is all fine and dandy because whatwg is run by corporations for corporate needs. But it isn't fine and the needs of applications are not the needs of documents.