Re:TailwindCSS v2.0
by rglullis on Thursday November 19, 2020 @10:15AM
(#25150323)
> If you know how to do this where you write the HTML with only semantic markup tags then don't touch it again while you style it with CSS.
No, I said that I style it with SCSS.
I can give you all the utility classes you want - in the form of mixins. Then all your site styling and components can be defined in terms of these mixins.
I said that I am not against Tailwind in general. What I don't understand about it is the idea of having already all the mixins and utility classes and then letting people stick those in the HTML.
> What tangible benefit are you getting by pushing to separate structure and presentation more than this?
Go take a look at the template sites like ThemeForest and CreativeTim. Some of the templates look actually quite nice and could be an excellent starting point for a project. What they all have in common is that you have 5 JS technologies and maybe 3-4 different styles and they sell each permutation of these as a separate "bundle".
Then you actually download the thing and start working with it. You find out that some older versions will use Bootstrap 3, some will use Bootstrap 4. Some of them have their widget implemented with an outdated jquery plugin, but the rest is with React/Vue. And then you realize why no one makes big projects out of these things, because it requires an all-or-nothing approach when it is not necessary.
In my fantasy land, we get javascript UI component libraries that are standardized and a separate set of SCSS implementation of "design languages". So when I am writing an app and I want to have, say, an autocomplete that looks like Material Design, I can import only one widget and one "theme", instead of hoping that some React/Vue/Angular/Nuxt/Svelte/JS_FRAMEWORK_DU_JOUR has already implemented components following the style of Material/Bootstrap/God-Knows-what-Design-Language-is-fashionable-today.
No, I said that I style it with SCSS.
I can give you all the utility classes you want - in the form of mixins. Then all your site styling and components can be defined in terms of these mixins.
I said that I am not against Tailwind in general. What I don't understand about it is the idea of having already all the mixins and utility classes and then letting people stick those in the HTML.
> What tangible benefit are you getting by pushing to separate structure and presentation more than this?
Go take a look at the template sites like ThemeForest and CreativeTim. Some of the templates look actually quite nice and could be an excellent starting point for a project. What they all have in common is that you have 5 JS technologies and maybe 3-4 different styles and they sell each permutation of these as a separate "bundle".
Then you actually download the thing and start working with it. You find out that some older versions will use Bootstrap 3, some will use Bootstrap 4. Some of them have their widget implemented with an outdated jquery plugin, but the rest is with React/Vue. And then you realize why no one makes big projects out of these things, because it requires an all-or-nothing approach when it is not necessary.
In my fantasy land, we get javascript UI component libraries that are standardized and a separate set of SCSS implementation of "design languages". So when I am writing an app and I want to have, say, an autocomplete that looks like Material Design, I can import only one widget and one "theme", instead of hoping that some React/Vue/Angular/Nuxt/Svelte/JS_FRAMEWORK_DU_JOUR has already implemented components following the style of Material/Bootstrap/God-Knows-what-Design-Language-is-fashionable-today.