|
| ▲ | Kerrick 12 hours ago | parent | next [-] |
| Arguably, that would be misuse of the semantic meaning of "section." While <section> is nearly as generic as <div>, they should always have a heading of their own. The author's <swim-lane> already has a nested <section> with its own <h2>, but the <swim-lane> itself doesn't get (or need) its own even-higher heading. And since that would drive us to <div>, I don't see any value in <div class="swim-lanes"> over <swim-lanes>. |
| |
| ▲ | strogonoff an hour ago | parent | next [-] | | It is unfortunate that you cannot simply move a block of HTML elsewhere where the context is otherwise perfectly suitable but expected heading level is different[0]. Section-relative headings were briefly part of the spec but quickly got removed. As it stands, I would not consider any block of HTML with an <hX> element portable. [0] https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Web/HTML/Reference/... | |
| ▲ | akst 10 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | Web components come with additional complexity, heavy use of custom element definitions are more complicated to manage. It’s more than just an aesthetic preference But if you’re not really using web components it’s harmless but it’s a bit odd and pointless. | | |
|
|
| ▲ | spartanatreyu 6 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| If you're not actually getting anything semantically useful out of the element, then you may as well use a custom element. Also by using a custom element instead of a class, you're saying this isn't anything else other than what I say it is. It's not a <section class="swim-lanes">, it's not a <form class="swim-lanes">, it's not a <blockquote class="swim-lanes">, it's a <swim-lanes>. If you make something only a class, people end up misusing it in odd places. |
|
| ▲ | etchalon 13 hours ago | parent | prev [-] |
| A handful of benefits: 1. Specificity - swim-line.buttons vs .swin-lines.buttons vs .buttons.swim-lanes.
2. Future pathing - Maybe you don't need a Web Component today, but you might need one tomorrow.
3. Cleaner - <swim-lane /> is just better than <div class="swim-lane" /> |
| |
| ▲ | pier25 9 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | > Specificity :where() gives you zero specificity. > Future pathing Sounds like premature optimization. And I say this as someone who has been using custom elements and web components in production since 2016. In fact one of my products offers WCs for our customers: https://docs.wavekit.app/web-components-wavekit-audio/ > Cleaner Debatable. Personally I find it cleaner to simply rely on CSS to solve something rather a combination of CSS, JS, and some custom markup. | | |
| ▲ | etchalon 8 hours ago | parent [-] | | 1. ... I do not understand what you mean. 2. One person's "premature optimization" is someone else's "this was literally something I dealt with this week." 3. This method relies on CSS and HTML, just as any other styling solution would. | | |
| |
| ▲ | smrq 11 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | "Clean" is the biggest lie in software development. It's an aesthetic opinion dressed up as objective fact. You think components are clean, someone else thinks classes are clean, and neither of you are wrong, except for believing that "clean" is a property of the code and not something entirely in your own mind. | | |
| ▲ | etchalon 8 hours ago | parent [-] | | I'm going to start using this logic whenever my wife talks about my office. |
|
|
