I always assumed `class` was a keyword, which is why then went with `className` instead.
both `className` and `htmlFor` are what the actual DOM uses. [1][2]
[1]: https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Web/API/Element/cla...
[2]: https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Web/API/HTMLLabelEl...
Re:React 16
by danabramov on Tuesday September 26, 2017 @06:15PM
(#15343031)
Yes, the reason is that you can't write something like
const { class } = props
So even though "class" will technically work now, it will still warn, and ask that you use "className".
(And officially supporting both would make it confusing for third party components since each would have to also support both.)
I think you can (with a warning), but it's still recommended to use the normal React naming conventions according to [0]:
> Note: always use the canonical React naming for all supported attributes.
Looking through the examples, it looks like non-string class values will be converted to strings, while non-string className values will be ignored (with a warning).
[0] https://facebook.github.io/react/blog/2017/09/08/dom-attribu...
> Instead of ignoring unrecognized HTML and SVG attributes, React will now pass them through to the DOM.
Does that mean we can start using "class" instead of "className"?