[kubb]

No shadow DOM, no web components, no template strings, etc.

[troupo]

> No shadow DOM

Funny you should say that when the current advise for web components is to avoid Shadow DOM (almost like the plague)

> no web components

As in?

> no template strings

Why would React need template strings? React is not the only framework that doesn't use template strings for anything (Vue, Solid, Svelte come immediately to mind). And it's hard to accuse those of being behind the times when Solid is literally the reason for the upcoming native signals proposal

[azangru]

> the current advise for web components is to avoid Shadow DOM (almost like the plague)

Could you provide the source for this advice?

[troupo]

It may have actually started with Web Components Community Group report itself: https://w3c.github.io/webcomponents-cg/2022.html

--- start quote ---

It's worth noting that many of these pain points are directly related to Shadow DOM's encapsulation. While there are many benefits to some types of widely shared components to strong encapsulation, the friction of strong encapsulation has prevented most developers from adopting Shadow DOM, to the point of there being alternate proposals for style scoping that don't use Shadow DOM. We urge browser vendors to recognize these barriers and work to make Shadow DOM more usable by more developers.

--- end quote ---

And probably continued in HTML Web Components https://blog.jim-nielsen.com/2023/html-web-components/

A more technical and measured take on Shadow DOM is here: https://nolanlawson.com/2023/12/30/shadow-dom-and-the-proble...

[jfagnani]

It's wrong - both that it's general "current advice", and the advice itself when it does pop up.

Yes, there are some people who say to build web components without shadow DOM, but I'm convinced they're only building leaf nodes so they don't need composition with slots. As soon as they try to build any kind of container element they hit big problems.

[azangru]

In a parallel discussion happening on Mastodon, someone says:

> People coming from React-land can have a hard time reasoning about the difference between a custom element and a template render function and when best to use each

> This abuse of the component system can indeed lead to a massive explosion in nodes on a page and the performance tanks because of that

I know I certainly have that hard time deciding when I need a custom element and when a render function.

[0] - https://front-end.social/@5t3ph/115135994774490769

[brazukadev]

> As soon as they try to build any kind of container element they hit big problems.

That's not true. Web components that render nothing will contain only their children as nodes, that's good enough for a good amount of container use cases.

So you can have something like:

  <uix-modal>
    <uix-button icon="wifi"></uix-button>
    <dialog>
      <div class="flex flex-col gap-4 p-4 w-[640px]">
       ...
      </div>
    </dialog> 
  <uix-modal>

It could be better, but this little annoyance is still better than React, Angular, and the other options.

[troupo]

> It's wrong - both that it's general "current advice", and the advice itself when it does pop up.

Unless you actually care about the web and its users. Then it turns out it's a very wise advice.

https://w3c.github.io/webcomponents-cg/2022.html

Web Components Community Group: 2022. You are one of the authors:

--- start quote ---

It's worth noting that many of these pain points are directly related to Shadow DOM's encapsulation. While there are many benefits to some types of widely shared components to strong encapsulation, the friction of strong encapsulation has prevented most developers from adopting Shadow DOM, to the point of there being alternate proposals for style scoping that don't use Shadow DOM.

...

Selection does not work across or within shadow roots. This makes fully-featured rich-text editors impossible to implement with web components. Some of the web's most popular editors have issues that are blocked on this functionality

...

Shadow boundaries prevent content on either side of the boundary from referencing each other via ID references. ID references being the basis of the majority of the accessibility patters outlines by aria attributes, this causes a major issue in developing accessible content with shadow DOM.

--- end quote ---

Those are just the tip of the iceberg as these are very explicitly stated in the doc.

Then there's the issues of shifting the responsibility to both developers and consumers to handle Shadow DOM correctly.

Styling/themeing is still pain despite several different specs like shadow parts.

Don't use styles in your components too much, use Javascript to inject CSS into document and shadow trees or else there will be performance impact https://w3c.github.io/webcomponents-cg/2022.html#constructab...

Don't use too many shadow roots or there will be performance impact https://front-end.social/@5t3ph/115135994774490769 (linked in the sibling comment by @azangru)

You can't participate in forms until you write more JS for it, and still your submit buttons will be broken with no solution in sight.

etc. etc.

You don't have to take my word for it. Here's Nolan Lawson, emphasis mine:

--- start quote ---

https://nolanlawson.com/2022/11/28/shadow-dom-and-accessibil...

Shadow DOM is a kind of retcon for the web. As I’ve written in the past, shadow DOM upends a lot of developer expectations and invalidates many tried-and-true techniques that worked fine in the pre-shadow DOM world.

--- end quote ---

[mdhb]

Did web components kill your dog or something? You have this truly bizarre fixation on the topic for multiple years now.

[troupo]

Perhaps I care about the direction in which the web is pushed by a very small number of people incapable of seeing beyond their solutions and incapable of admitting their own mistakes.