←back to thread

The Failed Promise of Web Components

(lea.verou.me)
367 points lemonberry | 4 comments | 30 Sep 20 15:59 UTC | HN request time: 0.643s | source
Show context
ChrisMarshallNY ◴[30 Sep 20 18:10 UTC] No.24641703[source]▶
I love her description of using a dependency-laden component:

> Using a custom element from the directory often needs to be preceded by a ritual of npm flugelhorn, import clownshoes, build quux, all completely unapologetically because “here is my truckload of dependencies, yeah, what”. Many steps are even omitted, likely because they are “obvious”. Often, you wade through the maze only to find the component doesn’t work anymore, or is not fit for your purpose.

That is so true. The "unapologetically" thing is important. I see this all the time. There's often a fair bit of 'tude, where I am looked at with condescension, for not knowing something "obvious."

The fig tree pic is perfect.

EDIT: Removed phrase that was possibly corrosive to the narrative.

replies(7): >>24641798 #>>24641833 #>>24641876 #>>24642200 #>>24642654 #>>24644698 #>>24651062 #
systemvoltage ◴[30 Sep 20 18:48 UTC] No.24642200[source]▶
> BTW: This lady has a Masters from MIT. She def knows her way around things.

I agree with all of what you said until you bought up this unnecessary credential wrapper. It leaves a bad taste - statements like this. I don't know why. Going to MIT is doesn't make you an automatic genius nor does it mean that they know their way around things. It bothers me.

replies(4): >>24642206 #>>24644873 #>>24659135 #>>24665136 #
pembrook ◴[30 Sep 20 22:39 UTC] No.24644873[source]▶
> It leaves a bad taste - statements like this. I don't know why.

Probably because those statements are logical fallacies, this one specifically is known as argumentum ad verecundiam in Latin, or "an appeal to authority."

The fact that the arguer holds a prestigious title (or wears a fancy crown) cannot prove or disprove any given statement.

The inability of humans to think logically has bothered people for thousands of years, read up on Aristotle for more info.

replies(1): >>24645078 #
1. ChrisMarshallNY ◴[30 Sep 20 23:00 UTC] No.24645078[source]▶
Just to set the record straight, here's why I mentioned it:

I like her writing style. She writes in a pithy vernacular that belies her educational credentials.

She writes like a cranky old man (takes one to know one). I think we need more writing like that, as opposed to the usual buzzword bouillabaisse that makes up a significant chunk of the tech WordSphere.

When someone writes like that, it can be easy to dismiss (I know this). I didn't know about her, or her creds, and was pleasantly surprised, when I read them, so I figured I'd share my pleasure and surprise.

I encourage highly-skilled, -experienced, -educated, -whatever folks to write in an accessible fashion; preferably, with warmth, humor and approachability. The world needs as much of that as possible.

I could really care less whether or not she is a woman. It probably means a lot more to her, than it does to me. I enjoyed her work, and my enjoyment was improved, when I learned her background, and expressed my pleasure.

I mean, why the heck do we always have to find things wrong with everything? Can't we just say "This is cool. I'd like to hold it up as an example of what I like."?

replies(2): >>24645537 #>>24659175 #
2. systemvoltage ◴[30 Sep 20 23:49 UTC] No.24645537[source]▶
I empathize with you in strongest way possible. I think we all should stop being offended so damn much.

I don’t know why I felt the way I did but you’re right - take it easy, we need to be a bit more flexible and allow for room of interpretation. Sorry I felt that way in my initial comment.

I think the offending word was “def”.

> This lady has a Masters from MIT. She probably knows her way around things

Sounds much better and less authoritative :) I know what you meant in the general sense.

Side note about the author's credibility: Some of the writing from this article is stolen without credit: https://twitter.com/brucel/status/1305820902903382016

The whole flugelhorn sentence.

replies(1): >>24647478 #
3. xmprt ◴[01 Oct 20 04:56 UTC] No.24647478[source]▶
The whole sentence? I couldn't even find a part of it other than the sentiment and "flugelhorn"

Seems like a coincidence especially since bashing on all the steps required for modern web development isn't a new idea.

4. hackerfromthefu ◴[02 Oct 20 05:22 UTC] No.24659175[source]▶
Absolutely, it's time to just ignore the hecklers. They are subtracting from the value that the producers create! When the dead mass of hecklers and pc twitter twatters gets too high our civilisation will fall behind or fail because of it. Healing the pc overgrowth crisis is becoming important for our future prosperity and possibly survival.