[bee_rider]

> A great example of a rich content website is the Tailwind CSS landing page.

This is a pretty bad example, right? It is the landing page for some web framework or whatever, that shows you it can make over-complicated websites by being itself an over-complicated website. It is being good at its job in some sense no matter what it does, because the thing it is showing is… the thing that it does.

But, this doesn’t show any evidence that any other websites need to be as interactive and dynamic as the tailwind website (they don’t).

Websites are all over-complicated, markdown is no curse. If this wall is true, it is a blessed line of defense.

[gherkinnn]

Tailwind is a styling system. And it makes sense that its website shows off what it can do.

It has nothing to do with complicated.

[benj111]

Yes, it is a bit bizarre.

The authors solution is more frame works to bridge the gap, but the only evidence for something beyond that gap is itself a framework.

Doubly troubling is that theyre pushing their own frame work, that presumably they think solves some real world problem, but can point to a concrete example of what theyre solving.

Finally. If you want to foist a complicated website on a user, you can't complain about complexity in the creation of the site. Quite why a dev feels the need to push a framework, to make a fancy site, just for me to install an ad blocker to remove the fancy (I assume thats what were really talking about here) to get back to markdown levels. I don't know.

[agnishom]

That made me chuckle. It is like showing how good my programming language by building an interpreter.