[emmacharp]

I invite (for fun and learning!) anyone here still thinking native CSS provides no efficient solution to the problems Tailwind may have solved 5 years ago to challenge me:

Bring up any said problem and I'll give you an efficient, robust, fast, simple and maintainable way to solve it in pure, native CSS (maybe even with further advantages!).

The time has come to embrace good ol' CSS again! Heheh.

[thiht]

I'm a new user of Tailwind, but there are 5 points where I believe Tailwind is wayyy more efficient than CSS:

- layout: flex and grid are great solutions, Tailwind just makes them extremely easy to use. Flex and grid are barely unusable without first defining at least 4 or 5 helper classes, more likely a dozen. Tailwind just provides them and makes them easy to use. I never could remember the flex properties, I learned the Tailwind classes I needed in like half a day of practice

- mobile first design: Tailwind strongly encourages mobile first design if you want to do responsive design. It scared me at first because media queries are hard to manipulate in CSS. I've never made a responsive design page faster than with Tailwind, it's insane how easy it is

- dark mode: as simple as `dark:xxx`. The default and dark properties being close together is awesome. As with responsive design, Tailwind prefixes make it so easy to do what's painful in plain CSS

- defaults: having sane, overridable defaults for everything (sizes, colors, whatever) makes the code infinitely more consistent. You barely even need to think about real values, just how it looks, and you have less risk of defining slightly different classes for no reason

- no cascading: CSS cascading makes it hard to reason about styles, and easy to break unrelated components by mistake. It's solved with CSS modules (or even with BEM), but Tailwind just eliminates the problem

CSS has the solutions, it just doesn't make them easy to use.

[emmacharp]

1. I don't think I understand why you think flex & grid are barely unusable... without a dozen classes..? Maybe an example would clarify this perception for me.

2. You barely need media queries anymore for responsive design. Auto-adapting flex or grid containers and the use of clamp() reduced 90% of my media query usage. I usually use like 1 to 4 media queries in project (for master layout and responsive nav, for example). And there's a nice side effect to this type of intrinsic design : layout and type is way easier to optimize for every viewport! Mobile first design is really easy to approach in this way.

3. You can apply a dark mode by only switching a theme file with design tokens inside. Way lighter, way easier to read, does not clutter your codebase.

4. As a corollary to the previous point, the defaults you are talking about can be CSS custom properties defined in a theme file as I think, Tailwind 4 will do. You could then use the exact same defaults in native CSS.

5. Simple rules about CSS usage, enforced by Stylelint for example, can prevent the vast majority (and maybe all!) of the cascading problems you mention. Here are some rules and a Stylelint config I posted in a reply below: https://ecss.info. I've got a good track record with teamwork and this config.

CSS solutions may be really easy to use when approached properly. I'm happy to follow up with examples and/or reply to subsequent questions and thoughts!

[Vinnl]

Ok, my problem is that I don't know just by reading the styles that other contributors wrote, whether they are still relevant, or if the HTML they applied to was changed or removed. They didn't write clean atomic commit, and I can't get them to adhere to some sort of convention.

The other problem is that I don't have a designer and tend to make things ugly given full freedom, but I do want things to have their own visual identity.

[emmacharp]

Great questions/problems!

1. I address the problem of relevance by inserting the CSS right into the component with a link tag. If the component is not used, the CSS isn't either. A positive side effect of this technique is that you always have an easy access to the CSS by following the link in your editor of choice. As for the relevance of the rules inside the component, the said component should be light/simple enough that this isn't harder that glancing a minute (max!) at both files.

2. You can use Stylelint to ensure adherence to specific rules. I have developed a config aiming to prevent these kinds of problems. You can find rules, guidelines and a link to the Stylelint config (still beta) at https://ecss.info.

3. A CSS theme file with custom property design tokens is sufficient. As I understand, Tailwind 4.0 made the switch to CSS tokens. You can thus use the same naming convention for your tokens in native CSS.

As complementary advantages you get future-proof code, no build step, and a lot less unused CSS (for instance, Tailwind's own homepage sports 85% unused CSS!).

I'm happy to elaborate further or respond to any subsequent questions you may have!

[Vinnl]

> I address the problem of relevance by inserting the CSS right into the component with a link tag. If the component is not used, the CSS isn't either.

Do the selectors in those style tags not apply globally? How do I prevent contributors (including myself) from accidentally writing a selector that affects HTML in other components? I see ECSS allows plain tag selectors for example?

Isn't the design token variable file quickly going to balloon? As you mention, it looks like Tailwind provides this now as well, but you'll still want to run the build step of generating the minimal style sheet that provides only the tokens you actually use, rather than having to compile that style sheet manually.

As a related question: if you're already running Stylelint, what's the problem with a build step?

And: is the CSS on Tailwind's homepage actually unused, or used in dynamically added HTML? Is the additional download+parse size actually significant, or does it e.g. compress well and not affect performance that much? Throttling network speed at least doesn't result in a terrible loading experience for me, it seems.

[emmacharp]

1. The stylelint config will flag any selector not scoped (be it a class or an attribute) to the filename. This way you'll be notified if any selector could be misapplied essentially preventing these global accidents.

2. You could use a build step for this, yes. Personally, I don't because the theme files more or less contain always the same tokens. I rarely add any (colors being the most frequent) and if I do, the cost of it being unused is minimal. My standard full theme file is around 5kb.

3. Stylelint complements my work but isn't necessary. My code does not depend on it to work, contrary to Tailwind, for instance. I'm free to stop using it any time.

4. It's a monolothic file containing all the code needed for the whole site and not only the page I'm looking at now. It may not make that much of a difference in performance, but still, the browser downloads CSS code it does not need now and then must read through all of it to apply needed rules. Not optimal.

By the way, it's great you came back with further questions! Hope to have addressed them at your satisfaction. Still at your disposal if you have more!

[Vinnl]

That generated some more question :)

But on the ECSS homepage I see selectors like `html`, `.flex-module` or `.is-loading` (I'm assuming `flex-module` and `is-loading` aren't components - if they are, then that sounds like being pushed towards a layer of indirection that I'd like to avoid?) - aren't those likely to affect other components?

What's the disadvantage of not being able to stop using Tailwind at any time? How likely is that to play out?

Why does it matter if something's "not optimal" if it doesn't make much of a difference in performance? (See also: not removing unused styles from your theme files :)

[emmacharp]

Great!

1. some simple selectors can be used in specific contexts (like `html` for type inheritance, for instance). `flex-module` is a component name (albeit a very generic one only used for example purposes...) and `is-loading` is a "state class". I use simple prefixes to distinguish between selector types and `is` is one of them.

2. Breaking changes could be introduced through the Tailwind dependency tree. Some update could be necessary to patch an exploit, again breaking functionality. Updates become routinely necessary. Which is not the case for native code. Also, using new CSS features can be more taxing within the TW ecosystem than in with vanilla CSS. In a nutshell, it's about simplicity, maintenance and the perenniality of your code. On the other hand, you may be "lucky" and never experience something like the above. But I'd wager there's more chance that you will than not. At least, my own dev experience tells me this.

3. Well, I'd say it's a matter of scale... I see 60kb of CSS on Tailwind's homepage. If more than 80% is unused, that's something like 45kb of CSS. I think at this amount, you could see marginal improvements in rendering and loading. At least, more than with comething like 2-3kb of unused CSS. Hehe. But yeah, as I said, marginal. BUT! hehe, with a less monolithic approach to bundling CSS, as with links in components, for instance, there's a real gain to be had: the browser delays reading the files not being used in the current viewport. So, if you footer is not displayed in the first screem it's CSS won't be read, accelerating overall rendering. This, in my experience, makes a palpable difference.

Hope I'm being clear, english is not my first language. And thanks for the mental workout! Hehe.

[naasking]

> Bring up any said problem and I'll give you an efficient, robust, fast, simple and maintainable way to solve it in pure, native CSS (maybe even with further advantages!).

I'd like to not have to read or write CSS. Let's see you tackle that. ;-)

[Vinnl]

Well, Tailwind doesn't really solve that for you either - you pretty much have to know CSS to be able to use it effectively, in my experience. Technically, you may not really be writing CSS, but in practice, I think all the reasons you might have for not wanting to write CSS still apply to writing Tailwind.

[naasking]

Not quite, with Tailwind:

1. you need to know the specific effects of the individual directives but you don't need to deal with the cascading behaviour and other complexities.

2. you don't need to leave your local markup to make styling changes.

3. you don't need to synchronize selectors across multiple files (non-locality).

And because Tailwind involves a lot of repetition of the same CSS classes for the same markup, it naturally drives you towards defining reusable HTML components that encapsulate the markup and CSS classes.

There are a lot of subtle usability improvements like this that avoid CSS footguns and make dev UX better overall.

[emmacharp]

1. Which part of the cascade do you struggle with? Because it can make your code really simple and efficient!

2. If you link your CSS inside your component you have a direct access to it. A simple editor split suffice to edit it. I would say that's a pretty standard workflow.

3. You can force (with Stylelint, for instance) the use of scoped selectors in CSS files, essentially preventing any selector spillover (which is a real problem). Scoping component selectors inside the one and only corresponding CSS file is important and achievable without complex code dependencies.

4. The drive to define reusable components should already be natural enough on its own! Heheh.

By approaching CSS with the good tools and mindset, you can have a great dev experience while preventing complex dependency chains, third party rules/lock-in. You can also use the most recent CSS features not implemented in Tailwind (looking at you clamp()!) to provide a better end-user experience more easily.

It's a great time to rediscover CSS!

[Vinnl]

That's fair enough, but I do still expect that someone who really wants to avoid CSS will still be put off by the extent to which Tailwind still is, in essence, CSS. I think Tailwind has advantages (the ones you note), but "being able to not learn CSS" is not it.