[leephillips]

One sentence in the article suggested that, ideally, people making websites would just learn CSS, but since that‘s an unrealistic expectation (why?), Tailwind can be useful if you have big team of “front-end engineers” who don’t quite understand the markup languages that they use in their jobs.

I can’t argue with that. But it suggests that if you work alone or in a small group, actually learning CSS might make more sense.

[Wolfr_]

I'll try and clarify what I mean here. Tailwind seems to appeal to devs who feel they never fully grasped CSS + design.

Because it provides a copy-pastable subset of reliable classes where you end result will look good.

As a company we are often hired to fill a knowledge gap (exactly in design and front-end). The nature of agency work is to leave a deliverable for the client to work with.

My idea is that when the project is over and the design/front-end gap still exists in the team, perhaps it is better to leave something more manipulatable (I used the word malleable originally).

I think with the great docs that Tailwind has it might be easier for someone who is not a front-end dev to manipulate a `<div class="p-4">` to `<div class="p-3">` than to come across a BEM/ITCSS component, written in SCSS* where you have to understand much more concepts to manipulate it skillfully.

*(our preferred stack really)

[andrewingram]

Counter-example: I’ve been building with CSS for about 20 years, and am very competent with it, but I’m a fan of the paradigm of atomic styles and eschewing the cascade. I don’t particularly love Tailwind, but a lot of the ideas and reasoning behind it are rock solid.

We need to move past the rhetoric of “Tailwind is for people who don’t know CSS”, when it’s only true in a correlatory sense because the majority of tech is always going to be newcomers. People who are CSS experts are just as capable of concluding that these newer paradigms are worth investing their time in.

[jarek83]

So are we supposed to unlearn CSS because we want to make sure that unskilled people can take over the project?

I believe that quick deliverable you mention, will become a big burden for that client in some future.

I saw already multiple projects where both Tailwind and regular CSS are used. This seems like unavoidable, since Tailwind looks like easy-peasy, but it actually can't be understood and without understanding CSS in the first place. Maintaining this kind of mix must be fun...

It's kind of sad that not-learning is hyped over mastering.

[kjksf]

Thanks.

What I needed today is for a rando on the internet to call me stupid, a dev who doesn't fully grasp CSS + design.

I use tailwindcss and so do other devs. Many of those devs are better than me and you.

Instead of assuming that everyone who disagrees with your choices is stupid, maybe reflect on popularity of tailwindcss and assume, in an Ockham's Razor kind of way, that it's a good technology. Even if it's not a technology that you personally want to use.

[Wolfr_]

I was in no way talking about you, I was talking about backend devs in general who are thankful for something like Tailwind.

Just like I, a front-end dev + designer am thankful for something like Firebase, because my backend skills are fairly nonexistent.

[yohannparis]

That went bad quickly! You are putting words in the mouth of the original comments for no reason. "a dev who doesn't fully grasp CSS + design" does not mean a stupid dev; it can be a dev who decides that he doesn't need to fully grasp CSS + design to do a great job. Why is that weird that the owner of an App design service agency prefers pure CSS over a library?

[ChrisArchitect]

yes this is all rooted/connected to the truth that the huge influx of dev/engineer-centric approach to everything web design has basically ruined/messed up front-end for the 5+ years

[hesarenu]

Are people using tailwind without knowing css?

[matthewmacleod]

Yes. I've most commonly seen it used for exactly that purpose – people who have no interest in knowing CSS but need to style something.

I think this is probably one of the most common sources of complaints. Some people who already know CSS in-depth will see Tailwind being endorsed by others, take a look themselves, and come to the conclusion "why on earth would I ever use this".

I totally understand that, because it's how I feel. But it's important to remember that people still want to style things without being CSS experts, and one of the things Tailwind is good at is letting that happen. It clearly fills a need and yelling at the proverbial clouds isn't going to help.

[dmitriid]

Not just that: I know CSS reasonably well, and I understand what most of Tailwind classes do on their own.

But for the life of me I could never come up with a consistent set of rules like margins, paddings, colors etc.

Tailwind is a mini design system on its own (even if it's "just a utility-first CSS framework"). I don't have to spend too much time thinking which margins to add or set the typography right. Set an `m-2` and a `text-sm`, and you're done :)

All/Most of that can definitely be replicated with, say, CSS vars, but then you're back to "okay, how do I consistently name these components".

[leephillips]

Apparently. This is how I interpreted this passage in the article:

“I can forever claim that people should just learn CSS but if that happens to be a difficult thing, maybe we should try to make a deliverable that is more… malleable.”

I could have misinterpreted that, however; I found much of the writing confusing.