I'm learning that a hard thing for folks to accept about web components is that they are just codifying *existing web capabilities*
We've been so conditioned that framework components twist things to fit invented APIs that we've genuinely lost touch with how the web actually exists 😫
This leads to unwarranted fear that to adopt even one web component is equivalent to taking on a burden equivalent to a new JS framework, including performance hits.
There's been a build up of momentum for web components, but perhaps we haven't found the most approachable, relatable track for messaging.
Perhaps we need to do more work around answering "what's in it for me?" for folks skeptical of even dipping in and trying them out.
Perhaps we've accidentally made it seem that the switch had to be all or nothing, which buries the real benefits of using web components.
@5t3ph I think you’re right about messaging. Especially as they’re often talked about using the Shadow DOM… It just seems like a much bigger leap. HTML is pretty straightforward. Folks say CSS is ‘hard’, but whatever. Javascript is a bigger step up, but then web components seems like a vastly larger step — like it’s not self contained. It feels like you have to know all this other stuff, and if you don’t feel you quite have a handle on the other stuff, you’re hosed.
@octothorpe
This is why I think shadow DOM is kind of a red herring. It's optional, and I think it's usecase is only in very large codebases with extremely distributed microfrontends.
@5t3ph
