• toxicsyntax
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    10
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    I think the article fails to mention that one of the reasons tools like Tailwind (and methodologies like BEM, etc.) exist in the first place is to facilitate bigger organisation sites.

    In my personal experience “plain old CSS” isn’t feasible as the number of mainterners on a site goes up. Once there is multiple teams (possibly even across multiple departments) contributing to a site, the cascading part of CSS means that it is more or less unavoidable that some change from one team unintentionally breaks something for another team - and this being visual things means that it is very hard to catch with automated tests.

    After having working in a big organisation for a while, most developers will eventually start wishing for something that would make sure that their CSS only applies to their own components. div tags with inline style attributes suddenly starts to look very attractive - which is what eventually led to something like Tailwind.

    • Kissaki@feddit.de
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      Wouldn’t it work with adequate scoping of components?

      A UI component gets an adequate, scoped, unique class name and CSS.

      I imagine tailwind doesn’t actually solve parent CSS declarations bleeding into components if they are not explicitly defined/overwritten?