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

Vanilla JavaScript support for Tailwind Plus

tailwindcss.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

11–20 of 202 posts

Re: Vanilla JavaScript support for Tailwind Plus

#11

Post by Alupis »

bikeshaving wrote: post #9
gavinray wrote: post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Tailwind Plus is a paid collection of UI components and templates. TailwindCSS itself is meant to be nothing more than a styling tool, like Bootstrap...

The title of the blog post mentions Tailwind Plus so I’m assuming it’s a paid feature. The ambiguity is probably intentional.

It's not very expensive, all things considered. $299 for a single-user perpetual license (includes all future updates too) or about $1k for a team license[1].

If it saves you a bunch of time writing and maintaining the sort of components they are showing off, probably worth it?

[1] https://tailwindcss.com/plus#pricing

Re: Vanilla JavaScript support for Tailwind Plus

#12

Post by paranoidxprod »

gavinray wrote: post #8
paranoidxprod wrote: post #2

Would love to know how they went about implementing these. I always find custom elements interesting. I know the guys over at data-star.dev used one to implement their inspector element, but unfortunately that is also behind pro. I know Lit is used a lot but I’m always looking for new approaches.

It's explained in the post.

I mean they mention the built in browser features they use, but make no mention of the actual authoring of the components unless I’m missing something. I’m curious if they’re leaning on existing frameworks for authoring web components or if they’re implementing them from scratch.

Re: Vanilla JavaScript support for Tailwind Plus

#13

Post by hbn »

bikeshaving wrote: post #6

This is a exciting use-case for custom elements, and probably how tailwind should have been implemented from the start, but it’s hilariously a paid feature?! ( https://tailwindcss.com/plus#pricing ) Intuitively, I’d expect the custom elements to be free and the framework integrations to cost money.

Yeah this seems like an odd thing to paywall. In the web dev world where everything is free, it's a pretty crazy ask to ask people to tie themselves to a UI framework where I guess you're forever paying a subscription just to continue using the framework?

It's like putting if postgres expected you to pay them a monthly fee.

edit: I see now their pricing is one-time perpetual access. Still, I'm genuinely curious how well this model works.

Re: Vanilla JavaScript support for Tailwind Plus

#14

Post by [deleted] »

hbn wrote: post #13
bikeshaving wrote: post #6

This is a exciting use-case for custom elements, and probably how tailwind should have been implemented from the start, but it’s hilariously a paid feature?! ( https://tailwindcss.com/plus#pricing ) Intuitively, I’d expect the custom elements to be free and the framework integrations to cost money.

Yeah this seems like an odd thing to paywall. In the web dev world where everything is free, it's a pretty crazy ask to ask people to tie themselves to a UI framework where I guess you're forever paying a subscription just to continue using the framework? It's like putting if postgres expected you to pay them a monthly fee. edit: I see now their pricing is one-time perpetual access. Still, I'm genuinely curious how w…

[deleted]

Re: Vanilla JavaScript support for Tailwind Plus

#15

Post by WorldMaker »

paranoidxprod wrote: post #2

Would love to know how they went about implementing these. I always find custom elements interesting. I know the guys over at data-star.dev used one to implement their inspector element, but unfortunately that is also behind pro. I know Lit is used a lot but I’m always looking for new approaches.

Since you are asking about other approaches, I've been doing some interesting and simple custom elements with my Knockout-inspired view engine [0]. I built an open source MPA application with a bunch of them [1]. I even gave a brief presentation on it [2] (each PR starting with #2 is a "slide"; I presented it in a "Presentation" profile for VS Code opening the numbered files in order, with the Live Preview extension side-by-side with a simple git alias to jump to "slide" merge commit based on PR number; I thought it went well to show off Developer Experience).

My biggest advice appears to be: remember that the Shadow DOM is optional.

[0] https://worldmaker.net/butterfloat/guides/web-components/

[1] https://github.com/WorldMaker/jocobookclub/tree/main/src/bf

[2] https://github.com/WorldMaker/butterfloat-presentation/pulls...

Re: Vanilla JavaScript support for Tailwind Plus

#16

Post by abtinf »

hbn wrote: post #13
bikeshaving wrote: post #6

This is a exciting use-case for custom elements, and probably how tailwind should have been implemented from the start, but it’s hilariously a paid feature?! ( https://tailwindcss.com/plus#pricing ) Intuitively, I’d expect the custom elements to be free and the framework integrations to cost money.

Yeah this seems like an odd thing to paywall. In the web dev world where everything is free, it's a pretty crazy ask to ask people to tie themselves to a UI framework where I guess you're forever paying a subscription just to continue using the framework? It's like putting if postgres expected you to pay them a monthly fee. edit: I see now their pricing is one-time perpetual access. Still, I'm genuinely curious how w…

> I guess you're forever paying a subscription just to continue using the framework

It's a one-time fee for unlimited use and lifetime updates, not a subscription.

Re: Vanilla JavaScript support for Tailwind Plus

#17

Post by benatkin »

bikeshaving wrote: post #6

This is a exciting use-case for custom elements, and probably how tailwind should have been implemented from the start, but it’s hilariously a paid feature?! ( https://tailwindcss.com/plus#pricing ) Intuitively, I’d expect the custom elements to be free and the framework integrations to cost money.

Another hilariously paid feature is https://sso.tax/

It's funny because they're unintuitive to their end users. However, that is deliberate - they are looking for a decision point that comes after, but not too long after, devs have heavily invested in the product.

Re: Vanilla JavaScript support for Tailwind Plus

#18

Post by bikeshaving »

Alupis wrote: post #11
bikeshaving wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The title of the blog post mentions Tailwind Plus so I’m assuming it’s a paid feature. The ambiguity is probably intentional.

It's not very expensive, all things considered. $299 for a single-user perpetual license (includes all future updates too) or about $1k for a team license[1]. If it saves you a bunch of time writing and maintaining the sort of components they are showing off, probably worth it? [1] https://tailwindcss.com/plus#pricing

Listen, I’m not against the Tailwind team getting their bag – they worked hard and created an amazing open source library. I just don’t think it’s in the interest of either users or maintainers to put vanilla JavaScript support behind a paywall.

Edit: apparently all framework integrations and the whole library and functionality is behind the same paywall? And regular tailwind is just the css classes/build process that I used to know? Do people not understand how casual readers might be confused about all this?

Re: Vanilla JavaScript support for Tailwind Plus

#19

Post by monkey_monkey »

bikeshaving wrote: post #18
Alupis wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's not very expensive, all things considered. $299 for a single-user perpetual license (includes all future updates too) or about $1k for a team license[1]. If it saves you a bunch of time writing and maintaining the sort of components they are showing off, probably worth it? [1] https://tailwindcss.com/plus#pricing

Listen, I’m not against the Tailwind team getting their bag – they worked hard and created an amazing open source library. I just don’t think it’s in the interest of either users or maintainers to put vanilla JavaScript support behind a paywall. Edit: apparently all framework integrations and the whole library and functionality is behind the same paywall? And regular tailwind is just the css classes/build process tha…

The entire component library is behind a paywall...are you saying they should be giving away the vanilla JS version?

Re: Vanilla JavaScript support for Tailwind Plus

#20

Post by yieldcrv »

bikeshaving wrote: post #18
Alupis wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's not very expensive, all things considered. $299 for a single-user perpetual license (includes all future updates too) or about $1k for a team license[1]. If it saves you a bunch of time writing and maintaining the sort of components they are showing off, probably worth it? [1] https://tailwindcss.com/plus#pricing

Listen, I’m not against the Tailwind team getting their bag – they worked hard and created an amazing open source library. I just don’t think it’s in the interest of either users or maintainers to put vanilla JavaScript support behind a paywall. Edit: apparently all framework integrations and the whole library and functionality is behind the same paywall? And regular tailwind is just the css classes/build process tha…

You can use vanilla tailwind with vanilla JavaScript
Post reply on HN