Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Microsoft Fast Design

fast.design

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

111–120 of 216 posts

Re: Microsoft Fast Design

#111

Post by pupdogg »

parksy wrote: post #85
pupdogg wrote: post #72

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Lol, love your comment! Funny thing is that there are more people on your side than what this community might tell you! Silence is golden for a reason ;)

I appreciate the support I guess but at the same time I don't understand what you mean by there are an unspecified number of people on my side and that silence is golden - either that means I should be quiet and join the throngs of the self-superior invisible some-jority which I think is condescending to the fine folk here, or it means I personally should be silent and not express my honest confusion, frustration and…

What I meant was that are a lot of like minded developers here who cringe every time they have to hear how JS is going to teleport us from Earth to Mars. And since there are no bonus cookies that can won by proving that you can create a functional website simply by using some good old HTML with CSS and vanilla JS, a lot of us resort to being silent and enjoy the show!

So, what do ya say? Would you React the same way? ;)

Re: Microsoft Fast Design

#112

Post by pc86 »

ggregoire wrote: post #66

For all the comments asking what's the difference between this and Bootstrap, Ant, jQuery UI, React, Vue and friends: Interfaces built with FAST adapt to your design system and can be used with any modern UI Framework by leveraging industry standard _Web Components_. The important word here is Web Components, which are like React or Vue components but using only standard HTML and JavaScript (no frameworks). I guess y…

That's FAST.

Re: Microsoft Fast Design

#114

Post by lucasmullens »

Udik wrote: post #78
ggregoire wrote: post #66

For all the comments asking what's the difference between this and Bootstrap, Ant, jQuery UI, React, Vue and friends: Interfaces built with FAST adapt to your design system and can be used with any modern UI Framework by leveraging industry standard _Web Components_. The important word here is Web Components, which are like React or Vue components but using only standard HTML and JavaScript (no frameworks). I guess y…

> but using only standard HTML and JavaScript (no frameworks). Sounds like they ship a framework with the browser and call it "standard". Given that the size of a UI components framework is tiny anyway (3kb for preact) I'm not sure it's such a revolution. I'm open to hearing alternative takes on this though.

If all the open source components I used all used preact, I wouldn't be concerned about the 3kb. But if each component author uses a different framework or even a different version of a framework, it quickly becomes something like 3kb * number of components.

Re: Microsoft Fast Design

#116

Post by rwieruch »

For anyone who is interested in seeing a practical example of using web components in a library like React https://www.robinwieruch.de/react-web-components Last year I worked for a large company which had Angular and React teams, so the idea was to use web components for their UI library and then just let the angular and react teams write wrapper for these components. I had to prototype how to use web components in react.

Re: Microsoft Fast Design

#117

Post by wslh »

I always wonder where is the VB6/Windows Forms for web apps. I don't want to know the intricacies of Rect/Angular/Vue, I just want to do a declaration of the UI, not programming. Zillions of apps doing the same thing and spending weeks and months on the same problems. I start to think that this is not interesting for, for example, Microsoft because the developer market will shrink and their developers, developers, developers mantra. I remember when Bootstrap come up and suddenly we don't need a lot of graphic design time to build a web page.

Just an additional note about VB6/Windows Forms. They helped to build commodity UIs but when you needed more advanced one you should rely on specific components.

Re: Microsoft Fast Design

#119

Post by Animats »

wslh wrote: post #117

I always wonder where is the VB6/Windows Forms for web apps. I don't want to know the intricacies of Rect/Angular/Vue, I just want to do a declaration of the UI, not programming. Zillions of apps doing the same thing and spending weeks and months on the same problems. I start to think that this is not interesting for, for example, Microsoft because the developer market will shrink and their developers, developers, de…

I always wonder where is the VB6/Windows Forms for web apps?

Me too. Dreamweaver once did that. But the Javascript/CSS crowd complicated layout so much that writing WYSIWYG layout tools became extremely difficult.

Blue Griffon is perhaps the last remnant of that era.

Re: Microsoft Fast Design

#120

Post by parksy »

dmitriid wrote: post #110
parksy wrote: post #108

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Okay I think I get it: 1. Define elements in script by extending htmlelement 2. Follow the allowed structure in the DOM so that the custom elements don't break / conflict with anything 3. Use CSS to make the custom element look nice. Then, basically what we have is: 1. A class-based way to attach event listeners in a standard interface (which is nice) 2. what we always had to do anyway (unless framework forces using…

In theory you wouldn't worry about idiosyncrasies of specific component libraries if they are based on web components because they would provide only a single interface: properties go in (as in customElement.myCustomProp = ), events go out (as in customElement.attachEventListener( , (e) => )). This is definitely true for "dumb" components aka leaf components such as labels, footers, links, basic inputs. However, sinc…

Is the only thing that stops components from colliding literally naming convention? Like != ? So it's basically a convention-based standard rather than a fixed standard? This feels like another example of the XHTML apocalypse coming full circle and we're trying to find objective approaches to loosely defined data.

I do feel I am exposing myself to some ridicule for being out of style and I regret my attitude in my original reply but it felt honest at the time, I am glad that we have had this conversation in general because it's given me a lot to think over.

My main fear that I developed over the years is we end up developing frameworks for frameworks instead of delivering tangible results. I've been on projects that ended up taking far, far longer and costing way more to maintain simply because we had to nurse the framework rather than deliver the results.

Anyway thanks for taking the time out again, I need to percolate for a while and look into some of the ideas that have been expressed here.

Post reply on HN