3 ms·

I've also made this argument, but I was wrong. It turns out it's also possible to model a UI. And, it's possible to do that relatively well with HTML. You can s

by hmeh 3y ago

I've also made this argument, but I was wrong. It turns out it's also possible to model a UI. And, it's possible to do that relatively well with HTML. You can see web components or React for contemporary examples of doing this (though no guarantee that the example you look at will be doing it well). It stands to reason that if it can't be done with HTML, then it can't be done with React, or Swift UI, or anything and we are all doomed. Of course, that's not true. > Tailwind sure is ugly, but it’s quick to write and a cinch to debug. And in my experience, most UI code is pretty ugly. It seems to come with the territory? UI code doesn't need to be ugly. It may come with the territory for most teams, but it doesn't need to be that way. We don't need to be working in giant monoliths that take an hour to deploy and run tests either, yet many teams are. We don't need to live in squalor, but when it's all we've known, we become accustomed to it. We give TED talks telling people how great it is to live in squalor and about the "one weird trick" that makes it a little more palatable. The only "trick" we need is design. I'm not saying it's easy (in that it is readily available and applicable knowledge for the average developer), but it is attainable.

anon373839 3y ago
Don't you find when developing web apps that you often need to use elements that have no semantic value? I'm referring to divs that are needed as hooks/exploits/workarounds for CSS, such as redundant containers that have (or don't have) relative position, or are needed for their stacking context, or to contain overscroll, or to prevent a shadow from being clipped, etc.? These problems also grow more complex when you have to compensate for Safari's issues. I always try to abuse ::before and ::after to streamline the markup, but there's a lot these pseudo-elements can't do.
- hmeh 3y ago
  I wouldn't say it's often anymore, but it happens. It comes with the territory. We can sometimes avoid giving them class names by targeting them with things like immediate child selectors. We do end up with mechanical class names from time to time. But that doesn't mean we throw in the towel on modeling entirely.

by hmeh 3y ago

anon373839 3y ago

Don't you find when developing web apps that you often need to use elements that have no semantic value? I'm referring to divs that are needed as hooks/exploits/workarounds for CSS, such as redundant containers that have (or don't have) relative position, or are needed for their stacking context, or to contain overscroll, or to prevent a shadow from being clipped, etc.? These problems also grow more complex when you have to compensate for Safari's issues. I always try to abuse ::before and ::after to streamline the markup, but there's a lot these pseudo-elements can't do.

hmeh 3y ago
I wouldn't say it's often anymore, but it happens. It comes with the territory. We can sometimes avoid giving them class names by targeting them with things like immediate child selectors. We do end up with mechanical class names from time to time. But that doesn't mean we throw in the towel on modeling entirely.