> Shoelace looks awesome, and I think it's libs like these that are the future.
They are decidedly not the future. If they were, they wouldn't implement the same primitive components that we were re=implementing twenty years ago.
> Native web components are the endgame for flourishing frontend ecosystem
They are not.
> in the future you'll be to build whole sites writing HTML like
Funny you say that. Because the original vision of Web Component was against quote, "great example of an empty body tag, and sort of this pathological case of piling yourself into the JavaScript boat" [1]
But now it's apparently "pile everything into a Javascript blackbox"
> it's a really nice minimally, and paradoxically simple way to build webpages that have the functionality you want without the hassle of heavier frameworks
It is literally a framework that you still have to tie together with data handling, events etc. Just because you hide it behind a "custom-component" doesn't mean the complexity has gone anywhere.
> One thing I really want to see tackled though (by a standards body) is the data management story.
Ah yes. The data management story.
> Then we get a world where we can drop pre-made display elements and pre-made data stores onto pages.
And how exactly do you propose to "just drop them" onto pages? Have you also perhaps solved the API story for those elements? I mean, isn't it the great lie that web components perpetuate of "just use premade components"?
And yet there are now a few hundred avatar web components, several thousand button components, a million badge components, and all of these primitive things are not compatible with each other.
They are decidedly not the future. If they were, they wouldn't implement the same primitive components that we were re=implementing twenty years ago.
> Native web components are the endgame for flourishing frontend ecosystem
They are not.
> in the future you'll be to build whole sites writing HTML like
Funny you say that. Because the original vision of Web Component was against quote, "great example of an empty body tag, and sort of this pathological case of piling yourself into the JavaScript boat" [1]
But now it's apparently "pile everything into a Javascript blackbox"
> it's a really nice minimally, and paradoxically simple way to build webpages that have the functionality you want without the hassle of heavier frameworks
It is literally a framework that you still have to tie together with data handling, events etc. Just because you hide it behind a "custom-component" doesn't mean the complexity has gone anywhere.
> One thing I really want to see tackled though (by a standards body) is the data management story.
Ah yes. The data management story.
> Then we get a world where we can drop pre-made display elements and pre-made data stores onto pages.
And how exactly do you propose to "just drop them" onto pages? Have you also perhaps solved the API story for those elements? I mean, isn't it the great lie that web components perpetuate of "just use premade components"?
And yet there are now a few hundred avatar web components, several thousand button components, a million badge components, and all of these primitive things are not compatible with each other.
[1] https://fronteers.nl/congres/2011/sessions/web-components-an...