> were lauded as high-level and the end of all frameworks for years before being rebranded Sources please? I've never met a single person that thought this. >

> were lauded as high-level and the end of all frameworks for years before being rebranded Sources please? I've never met a single person that thought this. > Because it literally is the example on MDN? You're very stuck on this bad example. With even a cursory understanding of how Web Components work you can understand that you can recreate the same component accepting the same props in any popular component based framework. Or using Web Components you could do this example component just as many different ways as you could with another component framework. There are many reasons to not use Web Components. Outside of some specific use cases I wouldn't use them. "A single MDN example weirdly used multiple attributes for list items, instead of child components or one attribute" is not one of them.