> I know you troll every Web Components and Polymer discussion you can now
This is not trolling. This is called hard truths that Web Component proponents are completely blind to.
Riddle me this: why is it that there are almost no resources, blog posts, projects, or comments that talk about and use vanilla Web Components? 99.9% of posts and videos about WebComponents always immediately use Polymer, or Stencil, or... or... or...
The answer is easy: Web Components are crap, pure and simple. They are unusable in their present form. You need to throw in a data binding library, a templating library, a virtual DOM, a callback handling library, a..., a... etc. Better still, throw in a full framework like Polymer or Angular.
Even the project we're commenting on, titled "Making Web Components Work" needs the following to make them work: "does so by providing an easy-to-use state management and rendering layer built on Virtual DOM (the basis of the core rendering technology of React). Through use of the Snabbdom Virtual DOM library and first-class support for multiple templating formats".
How the hell is that "Web Components", "standards" and "work"?
When you call out all these inconsistencies, half-truths and outright lies about Web Components, you're called a troll, go figure.
---
As an aside. I remember saying that templating in Web Components is also crap because you have to use horrible DOM APIs or `innerHTML` to do anything useful. Obviously I was called a troll etc. However, when Apple proposed Mustache-like template instantiation [1] the same very people who called me a troll pissed themselves with joy and wonder. You know Web Components APIs and specs are crap. You chose to bury your head in the sand, turn a blind eye and preach how "WebComponents are the future". Well, it took browsers 11 years to get to two-thirds of jQuery's capabilities. It will take another 50 to maybe get one-third of capabilities of Web Component frameworks or React, or Angular, or Vue (hell, of even Snabbdom).
This is not trolling. This is called hard truths that Web Component proponents are completely blind to.
Riddle me this: why is it that there are almost no resources, blog posts, projects, or comments that talk about and use vanilla Web Components? 99.9% of posts and videos about WebComponents always immediately use Polymer, or Stencil, or... or... or...
The answer is easy: Web Components are crap, pure and simple. They are unusable in their present form. You need to throw in a data binding library, a templating library, a virtual DOM, a callback handling library, a..., a... etc. Better still, throw in a full framework like Polymer or Angular.
Even the project we're commenting on, titled "Making Web Components Work" needs the following to make them work: "does so by providing an easy-to-use state management and rendering layer built on Virtual DOM (the basis of the core rendering technology of React). Through use of the Snabbdom Virtual DOM library and first-class support for multiple templating formats".
How the hell is that "Web Components", "standards" and "work"?
When you call out all these inconsistencies, half-truths and outright lies about Web Components, you're called a troll, go figure.
---
As an aside. I remember saying that templating in Web Components is also crap because you have to use horrible DOM APIs or `innerHTML` to do anything useful. Obviously I was called a troll etc. However, when Apple proposed Mustache-like template instantiation [1] the same very people who called me a troll pissed themselves with joy and wonder. You know Web Components APIs and specs are crap. You chose to bury your head in the sand, turn a blind eye and preach how "WebComponents are the future". Well, it took browsers 11 years to get to two-thirds of jQuery's capabilities. It will take another 50 to maybe get one-third of capabilities of Web Component frameworks or React, or Angular, or Vue (hell, of even Snabbdom).
[1] https://github.com/w3c/webcomponents/blob/gh-pages/proposals...