[tomxor]

Full native isolation. HTML, CSS, JS, the whole thing, no tricks, the browser isolates it for you. It's really nice to be able to make a web component, clearly define the JS, HTML and even CSS API in terms of variables, and then throw it into any environment without it breaking, or without creating a complex maze of CSS name spaces and framework dependencies.

[MrThoughtful]

Is there really ever a use case for that?

When do you want part of your page to have different fonts, colors, everything from the rest of the page?

[skrebbel]

We ran into this too, and ended up not using the Shadow DOM at all. We want our stuff to automatically use the page's fonts, sizes, colors etc. Also we want customers to be able to customize stuff with CSS without having to use JS hacks to inject CSS into the shadow DOM (this gets especially cumbersome when you're nesting web components). Personally I feel like the shadow DOM is the most oversold part of web components, in that it's so all-or-nothing that it often creates more problems than it solves.

[mock-possum]

Which is another thing I love about web components - if you don’t want shadow dom, then don’t use it - you can build using just custom elements.

[skrebbel]

True, but i wish there was a way to say "don't inherit anything here except fonts and colors".

Being able to make a new root for rems would be nice too.

[hmcdona1]

The Shadow DOM does exactly what you are asking for here. Just use CSS variables, they pierce right through:

https://open-wc.org/guides/knowledge/styling/styles-piercing...

[skrebbel]

yeah so this means that if i want to use a page's font family but not its font size, the user has to do extra effort, and set not just `font-family: "Comic Sans"`, but also `--some-component-font-family: "Comic Sans"`. i'd love it if i could just selectively inherit stuff and not other stuff, without the user having to learn which css variables my thing supports. of course you can't do this with domain specific stuff, but you could make a thing fit kinda sorta well into its environment by default, and right now using a shadow DOM doesn't let you do that.

[rty32]

It is not a choice in many situations. For a large company that has many different teams that own many different parts of a product, even though teams adhere to the same "UI standards", things get complicated quickly. For example, CSS classes that have name conflict can cause UI to break (which happens more often than you think, and strictly adhering to naming rules is just hard for humans). That's just one example. Custom elements with shadow DOM is a simple and straightforward solution to this, and it makes sense -- JavaScript code are scoped to modules and use imports/exports to define interfaces, and it is just natural to do that for UI instead of putting every class that other people don't care about in the global CSS space.

[pradn]

The use-case for having isolated objects with parameters, much like classes in Java, is to be able to a) share code, b) hide internal details, and c) have object behavior be governed solely by a constrained set of inputs.

So the point isn't to have your web component be different from the rest of the page. The point is that you can pass in parameters to make an off-the-shelf component look how you want. However, exactly how much freedom you want to give users is up to the component author. It is possible for there to be too little freedom, true.

See here [1] for a concrete example of someone writing a reusable web component, and figuring out how to let users customize the styling.

[1]: https://nolanlawson.com/2021/01/03/options-for-styling-web-c...

[eyelidlessness]

In terms of style isolation, the answer is very much “it depends”. And it depends as much on the nature of what the component does, as the kind of isolation you want to achieve.

- Namespace isolation. Example: you have different components in the same codebase or otherwise meant to work together; you may want assurance that a locally defined style attached to class “foo” doesn’t have unexpected effects on other components which happen to use the same class a different way. This is commonly achieved with build tooling, eg by mangling class names.

- Cascade isolation. Example: you have an embeddable widget that you want to look consistent in any context, regardless of the styles of its parent DOM. This is achievable to some extent without custom elements, but they are a way to achieve it with confidence in a relatively straightforward way (at the expense of other limitations and complexity).

[gedy]

This 100%. Web components get praised for this isolation - and it’s like the exact thing I do not want if I’m building an application. Like try to have a global CSS theme, or use bootstrap, etc. (Please don’t suggest I embed a link to global CSS in every component.)

Like I get it if you’re sharing a component on different sites, like an embedded component or ad banner, etc. But it just gets in the way if you’re trying to do normal things that the majority of web apps need.

[HumanOstrich]

There are ways to apply global styles to your components other than importing a global sheet. There's just not a standard way defined in the spec. Isolation by default is the correct path for them to take compared to the alternatives. That doesn't make it useless just because you don't know how to do it in a good way.

See https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Web/API/Web_compone...

[gedy]

My main point is that gets in the way, unlike most other web frameworks when building normal applications. It's a headwind that always comes up and hurts adoption imho.

[mixmastamyk]

From reading the parent site the use cases seem to be large enterprise and cross site components, say a twitter embed or advertising bar.

[SahAssar]

Web components don't do any JS isolation, right? And when you say HTML isolation I think its probably important to say that any custom element registered is global, so if Web-Component-A uses Web-Component-B version 1 then Web-Component-C cant use Web-Component-B version 2 (unless Web-Component-B includes the version in its name).

If you want actual isolation of the whole web stack (HTML/CSS/JS) I don't think there are any alternatives to iframes.

[ThatMedicIsASpy]

It is my personal nightmare. I want to write custom css to customize my Homeassistant. Only to find out every single thing is in a shadow root and I cannot write css to adress what I want to change. WHICH WOULD BE REALLY SIMPLE IF I CAN WRITE PLAIN OLD CSS.

I can't believe how extremely mad and frustraded I became when I found out - writing this out fills me with rage.