| I don't think this is quite right. I'm not a tailwind user but I think the following: ```
<div class="flex">Foo</div>
<div class="flex">Bar</div>
<div class="flex">Baz</div>
``` gets generated to: ```html
<div class="flex">Foo</div>
<div class="flex">Bar</div>
<div class="flex">Baz</div>
``` ```css
.flex {
display: flex;
}
``` If we replaced this with `style` attribute usage, you'd get: ```
<div style="display: flex">Foo</div>
<div style="display: flex">Bar</div>
<div style="display: flex">Baz</div>
``` Assuming the content is gzipped when transferred (a good assumption), the non-Tailwind version's payload is smaller because there are no separate CSS definitions. Your statement is true in the general sense (a page can easily load unused CSS with other CSS/styling approaches) but I don't think it's correct to say that using Tailwind results in smaller payloads vs. using style attributes. |