I don’t like Tailwind. But you probably have it the wrong way. You claim malicious intent such as vendor lock-in. Your article sounds as if all this was planned

I don’t like Tailwind. But you probably have it the wrong way. You claim malicious intent such as vendor lock-in. Your article sounds as if all this was planned as a cash grab from the beginning. The more likely development path of Tailwind was: 1. Create a utility CSS system, use it, feels nice, publish an article around it why it might make sense and why it feels nice (which is probably a hindsight explanation) 2. People start using it, way more than ever expected. 3. Iterate on the product That’s it. I’m pretty sure nothing about this was planned, the vendor-lockin wasn’t planned and just happened. While your arguments about inconsistencies about semantic components in Catalyst vs semantic class names are right, it is highly likely your assumptions are missing a critical piece, because there are clearly many happy users.