DEV Community

loading...

Discussion on: Create Reusable Web Components in HTML

Collapse
scott_yeatts profile image
Scott Yeatts

Excellent breakdown. One of the most interesting things I've been looking at for the last couple of years is the slow shift to a compiler pattern in JS frameworks. Svelte, Stencil from Ionic and github just came out with one recently called Catalyst that looks a lot like Stencil without JSX on a cursory inspection. Except for Svelte (where it's optional) they compile to web components.

Angular and Vue have options to compile into web components, Salesforce has been using lightning web components since 2016 (I think it was 2016), Red hat is moving the next version of Patternfly to WC, Apple's been using WC in a few places since 2018, the list goes on. I see a lot of comments about how people "don't see it"... But they would have to be actively ignoring it or in <insert top 3 framework here>-only land for that to be true.

Keep in mind, Web components have only been adopted into Firefox since Oct of 2018, and Edge since it went Chromium, so it's still early days for the spec, but it definitely looks like the trend is moving towards web components/native JS sent to the user's browser and ever so slightly away from sending a big framework to act as a runtime. But that shift takes time and articles like this to get the word out!

Web components also have a terrible reputation from around 2015 when the v0 spec was out and polymer and a few other projects we're trying to implement them. It's also where things like "Shadow DOM is bad for SEO" come from. It's outdated info. It got much better with v1 and the new generation of tools like the ones I mentioned plus lit-element and lit-html (the "new" polymer from Google)

Collapse
dannyengelman profile image
Danny Engelman

"Keep in mind, Web components have only been adopted into Firefox since Oct of 2018, and Edge since it went Chromium, so it's still early days for the spec,"

This is a funny argument.
So something is a JS standard, but a JS standard has to mature like wine or whiskey before you can use it?

Collapse
scott_yeatts profile image
Scott Yeatts

Not really an "argument" so much as a signal, or setting expectations. A common argument against using WCs that I've encountered since I started using them back in 2018 was the lack of tools and libraries compared to the current framework ecosystem.

The difference is that those frameworks have had a decade+ of tooling behind them.

The same thing happened when transitioning the ecosystem away from jQuery, as a lot of engineers at the time argued against moving away because of the huge plugin ecosystem and tools like Bootstrap that depended on jQuery.

Just like jQuery could be used inside a framework environment (and still is in some environments to this day), WCs can be used inside the traditional framework environments.

But if people allow that kind of FUD to stop them from adopting new changes to the spec, the ecosystem will never grow, and we'll still be building the same old React applications 20 years from now instead of pushing the discipline further and taking advantage of tools that are natively supported in the browser.

So in a way, from the perspective of adoption and support, my answer is that yes, there is a certain amount of maturing that anything introduced into the JS (or any other language's) ecosystem needs.

Even the spec went through two drafts before adoption, but now that it HAS been adopted, it will take a while for the ecosystem to build.

That said, the difference in support from 2018 (where there was little to none) and today is a pretty significant change, and I expect it to keep growing over the next few years.

Thread Thread
dannyengelman profile image
Danny Engelman

But if you think of Web Components as just a language feature...

No one is saying, well... Set and Map have only been possible for N years, so be careful using them...
and no one is NOT using them because there is no extra tooling.

Biggest problem with WCs is that most developers are comparing them to other technologies.
Comparing them to RAVS (React,Angular,Vue,Svelte) is like comparing Set/Map to Redux

And (maybe) an even bigger problem IS the tooling available; the number of "Web Component" libraries is just crazy. Means most people learn A Tool instead of The Technology.... and a fool with a tool, is still a fool (is what we learned from jQuery)

𝘞𝘦𝘣 𝘊𝘰𝘮𝘱𝘰𝘯𝘦𝘯𝘵𝘴 𝘢𝘳𝘦 𝘯𝘦𝘸 𝘑𝘢𝘷𝘢𝘚𝘤𝘳𝘪𝘱𝘵 𝘭𝘢𝘯𝘨𝘶𝘢𝘨𝘦 𝘧𝘦𝘢𝘵𝘶𝘳𝘦𝘴 𝘸𝘪𝘵𝘩 100% 𝘮𝘰𝘥𝘦𝘳𝘯 𝘣𝘳𝘰𝘸𝘴𝘦𝘳 𝘴𝘶𝘱𝘱𝘰𝘳𝘵,
𝘵𝘩𝘦𝘺 𝘢𝘳𝘦 𝘩𝘦𝘳𝘦 𝘵𝘰 𝘴𝘵𝘢𝘺 𝘧𝘰𝘳 𝘢𝘴 𝘭𝘰𝘯𝘨 𝘑𝘢𝘷𝘢𝘚𝘤𝘳𝘪𝘱𝘵 𝘪𝘴 𝘢𝘳𝘰𝘶𝘯𝘥.

Should be the only sentence we write to newbies.