mjml-react VS Tailwind CSS

Unfortunately, the react-mjml library is no longer maintained: https://github.com/wix-incubator/mjml-react#notice-this-proj...

Mailing is a new tool based on React components to create templates. Under the hood, it uses mjml-react. A package, that is porting mjml markup language into React component. Thanks to this, we can use render e-mail templates using React.

Agreed that MJML is great, but I wouldn't call JSX a useless abstraction. Using JSX as a templating language for MJML has real benefits, like being able to use javascript directly in templates instead of having to remember handlebars/mustache/nunjucks/etc templating syntax.

And libraries like mjml-react make it really easy.

https://github.com/wix-incubator/mjml-react/

I will say that it sucks just as a much from the developer front. I had to build some email templates for a project a few weeks ago and I was shocked how wired it was compared to regular webdev.

Using a framework is almost a requirement if you don't want to spend all your time on little differences between email clients. The layout is really wired too, with the recommendation to use a ton of nested tables. Not to mention wired bugs like Apple Mail not rendering a background unless you have an image on the page.

The best solution I've found thus far is to use MJML React [1]. This sorta normalizes things and lets you write normal react code that gets transpiled into some abomination that Outlook can read. But it sucks that the only two options that are actually worth a damn seem to be MJML[2] and Foundation[3]. If anyone has had good experiences with other frameworks I'm very much open to suggestions.

[1]: https://github.com/wix-incubator/mjml-react

[2]: https://mjml.io/

[3]: https://get.foundation/emails.html

For email, mjml is the way to go in my opinion. There is this package that lets you use it with react, I've used it on several projects and it worked very well https://github.com/wix-incubator/mjml-react

There is actually a react integration so you don't have to use their template language https://github.com/wix-incubator/mjml-react

You can use any frontend framework you want — react-based tooling, however, has a natural advantage as it models everything as a function of state, which can map 1:1 with the concept in Burr. In the demo app we use react, react-query, and tailwind, but we’ll be skipping over this largely (it is not central to the purpose of the post).

Tailwind CSS: A utility-first CSS framework for rapidly building custom designs.

First, you need to make sure that you have a working Tailwind CSS project…

Tailwind CSS

With better CSS approaches like TailwindCSS and Vanilla Extract (which we're heavily using) it's much easier to maintain the UI and make sure it doesn't change unexpectedly. No more conflicting CSS classes, much less CSS specificity issues and much less CSS code in general.

This app was built with Svelte Kit, Tailwind CSS, and many other technologies. For a full rundown, please visit the GitHub repository

Unlike Tailwind, which has over 77,000 stars on GitHub, Mojo CSS has about 200 stars on GitHub. But the Mojo CSS documentation is fairly good and you can find most of the information you’ll need there.

JavaScript React Flowbite Tailwind Firebase - Auth, Database, and Hosting Vite

- Performance is a feature.

Another common interpretation of brutalism is aesthetic, reacting to overly complicated user interfaces by creating simpler, more direct ones. Tailwind CSS (https://tailwindcss.com), one of today's most popular CSS libraries, promotes this approach in its component examples. There's also a neat library I've seen recently called "Neobrutalism Components" for React that I like (https://neobrutalism-components.vercel.app), providing components with a similar look and feel to Gumroad. This might more accurately be called 'Neo-Brutalism,' as noted in the comments.

A more engineering-centric interpretation of Brutalism focuses on form, structure, and efficiency, drawing significantly from brutalist architecture principles. Apart from the user interface itself, most mobile, desktop, and web applications are extremely bloated and often perform worse than sites from 10 years ago did. While one HTML file might be "less brutalist" than the original HN site, it is substantially more brutalist than any HN mobile app in existence, and offers nearly identical functionality.

A broader interpretation of brutalism, which could be termed 'Meta-Brutalism,' is embodied in the overall experience on this site through UX flows. Yes, in the strictest sense, the original HN site is more Brutalist in many ways, but it only shows 30 articles at a time and does not function as a PWA. For this site, the experience of reading 10 stories is arguably less brutalist, but for quickly browsing through several pages and skimming articles (which is how I read HN) it is a lot faster, and in my opinion, more Brutalist.

My primary inspiration was addressing software and tool bloat in UIs rather than strictly adhering to every principle set forth by David Bryant Copeland. I don't find it convincing that this site "isn't brutalist" compared to really any other experience apart from the Main HN site, and I would argue the overall experience is more brutalist in its performance and scrolling behavior.

As a side note: I generally don't like Brutalist architecture that much although I believe it is unfairly maligned. I visited the Salk Institute once and enjoyed it though (https://www.archdaily.com/61288/ad-classics-salk-institute-l...).

- Staff Software Engineer ($275k/yr): https://tailwindcss.com/careers/staff-software-engineer

We're small, independent, and profitable, with a team of just 6 people doing millions in revenue, and growing sustainably every year. You'd work directly with the founders on open-source software used by millions of people.

If you like the idea of working on a small team that cares about craft and isn't trying to achieve VC scale, I think this is a pretty awesome place to do your best work.