[tibastral2]

What is funny with your article is that you talk about tradition, when actually these traditions are based on assumptions which are themselves based on beliefs like : "separation of structure and style are a good thing".

But this belief is only true if the language to describe the structure is html or js which creates not reusable pieces of style/structure.

But when you go for a different approach where everything is functions and strong types (ADT), like when you use haskell for exemple, this debate is over, because you handle EVERYTHING in your code, and stop fragmenting the truth into opaque and dissociated worlds (html, js, css, database, glue, docker, ...).

[baxtr]

I think this is a protypical discussion in tech. I have seen it soo many times in different areas.

The purists ("that’s how things ought to be!") and the pragmatists ("well but it works well and people understand it seemingly").

[tibastral2]

I don't recommend css. Css is BLOATED. And tailwind makes it a little less bloated, but it's still not strongly typed, and not very re-usable, especially in code.

But your approach is from the past man, really... .btn is not reusable among pages / projects / etc. => it's always different, and when you understand that specificity wars is the main problem of css, you will not want to use your idea again.

It LOOKS cool to have a <button class="btn"> inside your html. because it's more readable. But it's NOT explicit. You fragment truth into different pieces. and it makes it IMPOSSIBLE to test things in isolation.

One last thing. Using all the "last features" of css is just putting you in a place where you depend on the browser carriers to handle things for you when I prefer personnaly to rely on myself and my craft. But that's a personal one ;)