nano
webcomponents
nano | webcomponents | |
---|---|---|
5 | 34 | |
1,426 | 4,314 | |
0.7% | 0.2% | |
5.6 | 4.4 | |
2 months ago | 3 months ago | |
TypeScript | HTML | |
MIT License | GNU General Public License v3.0 or later |
Stars - the number of stars that a project has on GitHub. Growth - month over month growth in stars.
Activity is a relative number indicating how actively a project is being developed. Recent commits have higher weight than older ones.
For example, an activity of 9.0 indicates that a project is amongst the top 10% of the most actively developed projects that we are tracking.
nano
- Nano JSX โ 1kb JSX library with SSR
- Web Components Eliminate JavaScript Framework Lock-In
-
That people produce HTML with string templates is telling us something
for sure not suggesting using E4X as it is, JSX has evolved a lot from E4X. For example, as small implementation such as https://nanojsx.io would be a good start.
- VanJS (Vanilla JavaScript): smallest reactive UI framework
- NanoJSX โ SSR first, lightweight 1kB JSX library
webcomponents
- "open-stylable" Shadow Roots ยท Issue #909 ยท WICG/webcomponents
-
Web Components Eliminate JavaScript Framework Lock-In
It's not all that shiny. Web components have global names (you should pretty much apply a prefix/namespace if you want to work with others) and managing multiple version of the same component in the same page is an issue in any non trivial codebase (either use a different name per version or fix all breaking changes at once during the upgrade, unless the draft about scoping web elements became standard https://github.com/WICG/webcomponents/blob/gh-pages/proposal... )
-
HTML Web Components
I've recently just started playing with Web Components without a build environment. Meaning, no npm, no bun, no webpack, etc, and no dependencies; in typescript. Intellij can autocompile down to js and the browser view injects a small onchange handler for live updates when developing. So far no problems.
The only thing holding web components back seems to be HTML Modules; being able to link to a .html file instead of a .js file to import a web component. Because of this if you want to use templates or anything more complicated you need to do the ugly inject of .innerHtml = `...`, which I thought would be a problem but the IDE parses the template string very nicely. It would be great to make a component in HTML and any javascript you would put in a tag. It seems like there a lot of bureaucracy involved in getting HTML Modules out the door since its been eight years.<p><a href="https://github.com/WICG/webcomponents/blob/gh-pages/proposals/html-modules-explainer.md#high-level-summary">https://github.com/WICG/webcomponents/blob/gh-pages/proposal...</a>
-
Lit 3 Release Announcement
We're trying to advocate for greater flexibility in cross-component styling. One proposal is "open styleable shadow-roots" which would be an opt-in to let styles from above a component to apply to it's shadow root. I think this would help migration in situations where app teams are currently using global stylesheets.
Feedback and support of the need for something like this would help a lot: https://github.com/WICG/webcomponents/issues/909
-
Things you forgot because of React
))
Part 1.
> I honestly believe that 90% of the dislike for WC comes from the name "connectedCallback". If they'd named it "onCreate" or something, everyone would be using it
Of course not. None of the criticism towards Web Components ever mentions "connectedCallback", or how it should be named differently.
Do you know the actual reason so few are using them? Let's skip the atrocious not-really-high-level not-really-low-level imperative API that they offer.
How about:
- 13 years after introduction they still need 20 more specs to try and patch just some of the holes in their original design: https://w3c.github.io/webcomponents-cg/2022.html
- Shadow DOM is infecting every spec so that the actual useful specs like Scoped CSS have to be delayed almost indefinitely to try and figure out how to work with this abomination of a design
To quote the report linked above, "many of these pain points are directly related to Shadow DOM's encapsulation"
- The amount of specs that are required to make them work, barely, and be "good web citizens". And the amount of APIs.
Oh, you want your custom input to a) be able to send its data in a form, and b) be accessible to a label outside of your component? Well, there's a separate API for a) and there's some separate future API for b). And meanwhile your custom button won't be able to submit your form, sorry, it's a 4-year old issue with no solution: https://github.com/WICG/webcomponents/issues/814
And all that despite the fact that there are already a dozen specs covering web components, and dozens more on their way.
- Web Components ar HTMLElement. It means you cannot use them inside SVGs.
This is impossible:
-
Building a Front End Framework; Reactivity, Composability with No Dependencies
The lit-plugin in for VS Code offers syntax highlighting, jumpt-to-definition, etc: https://marketplace.visualstudio.com/items?itemName=runem.li...
Prettier already supports HTML in html`` strings, likewise, CSS.
> Is there a way in Lit to write the templates in regular HTML rather than a string?
This would require a compiler. You would need to load the HTML into the JS module graph and JS can't do that yet, though there is a proposal for it: https://github.com/WICG/webcomponents/blob/gh-pages/proposal...
Template in HTML also have the problem of the data not being in scope as it is in JS, and there not being an expression language. So you ned up having to re-implement a lot of JS embedded into the HTML syntax, which then preferences a compiler-based approach to make fast. It turns out to be a lot simpler to embed HTML in JS.
-
I am experimenting with Typescript. Is this way of defining a constructor considered normal or an abomination?
It's more than just sugar now. You can't even write web components functionally: https://github.com/WICG/webcomponents/issues/587
-
Declarative Shadow DOM
gzip/brotli handles this very well, but it still is text to parse through.
Some form of declarative CSS module scripts would help a lot. A feature request for that here: https://github.com/WICG/webcomponents/issues/939
- risk of accessible components
-
Templating in HTML
In the past I've seen this one:
https://github.com/WICG/webcomponents/blob/gh-pages/proposal...
Perhaps there are more recent versions.
I liked the spirit of the proposal, but never studied it.
What are some alternatives?
van - ๐ฆ VanJS: World's smallest reactive UI framework. Incredibly Powerful, Insanely Small - Everyone can build a useful UI app in an hour.
stencil - A toolchain for building scalable, enterprise-ready component systems on top of TypeScript and Web Component standards. Stencil components can be distributed natively to React, Angular, Vue, and traditional web developers from a single, framework-agnostic codebase.
vanilla - An OpenResty Lua MVC Web Framework
WHATWG HTML Standard - HTML Standard
tinyjs
custom-elements - All inclusive customElements polyfill for every browser
htmlgo - A library for writing type-safe HTML in Golang
shoelace-css - A collection of professionally designed, every day UI components built on Web standards. SHOELACE IS BECOMING WEB AWESOME ๐๐๐
phpStageManager - Web-based theatre management utility
design-reviews - W3C specs and API reviews
imperative - Structured UI Programming with ES6 Generators
eureka - Lucene-based search engine for your source code