Yes! First I should point out that "reset"-style element selectors are usually ok. But for component CSS classes are king. It's why BS4 styles naked <table> tags with reset styles, but offers the .table class as an option if you want the look and feel of their Table component.

BS has actually has an .h1 class. Eventually a design calls for an <h2> that needs to have the visual appearance of an h1 but for SEO or HTML semantics reasons needs to be an h2.

Maintaining any site of a certain size it spirals into a nightmare quite quickly. Look at how Bootstrap 4 can add a dropdown to a <div> or a <nav>. If your rule was just `nav {}` you wouldn't have that portability, `.dropdown` is clearly superior. On sites of scale modular CSS wins every time.

>It's not Bootstrap. Different paradigm.

Could have fooled me as a lot of the class names and styling are identical. If the m-* and p-* spacing utilities are identical, is it really a different paradigm? BS has (Sass) variables as well.

This is certainly true for components, and Shoelace does style components this way (look at switches and tabs, for example). But for basic elements (non-components) IMO a clean reset is reasonable to expect.

Agreed, it's inconsistent. What if I want a <table> without borders?

Should I expect an <a> with `.text-success` to overwrite `.tab-group a`? Or do I need a new class for `.tab-group .text-success`?

Look at how BS4 broke up Navs from being `.navbar > li > a` to being .navbar, .navbar-item and .navbar-link and think about why they did.

Definitely some good arguments. Nothing is perfect, of course, and I'm always open to feedback like this.

In the meantime, a borderless table could be a modifier: table-borderless (i.e. like table-striped or table-bordered).

Just a different approach than what a lot of folks are used to :)