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

Tailwind UI

tailwindui.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

201–210 of 367 posts

Re: Tailwind UI

#201

Post by doubletgl »

joaodlf wrote: post #12

When I first learned about Tailwind I though "wow this is amazing!", but it quickly became obvious I was more or less learning another "language", which I really didn't need when re-entering the crazy world of frontend. I might reconsider it again once I am more comfortable with what frontend has become, but that is still quite a bit away.

We ended up painfully removing it from a large frontend project because the custom classes sprinkled everywhere got out of hand and the design started to look more and more inconsistent in a lot of places. Switched to CSS modules (and React components using them) and never looked back.

Re: Tailwind UI

#202

Post by arendtio »

Sometimes I wonder why Open UI5 [1] is so little known within the front-end community. I mean, in a world where long term support for frameworks is rare, having a component library backed by a large company like SAP should be quite valuable.

[1] https://openui5.org/

[2] Sample App: https://github.com/SAP-samples/openui5-sample-app

[3] Slider in the component library: https://openui5.hana.ondemand.com/entity/sap.m.Slider/sample...

Re: Tailwind UI

#203

Post by runako »

arendtio wrote: post #202

Sometimes I wonder why Open UI5 [1] is so little known within the front-end community. I mean, in a world where long term support for frameworks is rare, having a component library backed by a large company like SAP should be quite valuable. [1] https://openui5.org/ [2] Sample App: https://github.com/SAP-samples/openui5-sample-app [3] Slider in the component library: https://openui5.hana.ondemand.com/entity/sap.m.Sli…

Good gracious, you have to install a toolchain specific to the UI framework to see the sample app? I know I'm curmudgeonly about front-end toolchain bloat, but doesn't this seem excessive?

Re: Tailwind UI

#204

Post by hello_moto »

arendtio wrote: post #202

Sometimes I wonder why Open UI5 [1] is so little known within the front-end community. I mean, in a world where long term support for frameworks is rare, having a component library backed by a large company like SAP should be quite valuable. [1] https://openui5.org/ [2] Sample App: https://github.com/SAP-samples/openui5-sample-app [3] Slider in the component library: https://openui5.hana.ondemand.com/entity/sap.m.Sli…

1. is heavy (size)

2. is huge (libs)

3. was made by SAP for custom HANA apps with "normalized" widgets and skins, originally known as SAP UI5

4. MVC, Single-App, two-way data-binding, tutorials are hard to grasp, conventions that may not lend itself to front-end devs mindset.

5. naming convention is a mixed of Java and C++ (hungarian notation) instead of JavaScript

Source: used SAP UI5 in the past. Nobody likes it.

Re: Tailwind UI

#205

Post by rojoca »

jp_sc wrote: post #162
city41 wrote: post #124

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It’s common, even expected, to extract that card into a component of some kind (React, web components, mustache template, etc) so you still only have to update the css once.

Sure, until, you need a variation on that card for some elements, and add some other tailwind classes to the HTML to do it. Everything seems to work fine for a while. Then you update the styles of the card again but the new styles clash with the ones in those tailwind classes and you end with broken styles in some elements. Mixing components and utility classes is a recipe for future chaos.

No, you just create a new card component and adjust the tailwind classes on it.

Or, if it is a minor change, then conditionally include / exclude a small subset of tailwind classes.

The point is to not write your own CSS, you only use tailwind classes. In this way you can look at the template for each of your components and reason about / edit their style and layout easily.

Re: Tailwind UI

#206

Post by jrochkind1 »

newfeatureok wrote: post #193
jwr wrote: post #184

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I use Semantic-UI, which had a problem of finding sustainable funding. There is a community fork (Fomantic-UI), which does not align with my (business) needs: stability, bug fixes, long-term sustainability, rather than adding features left and right and becoming Yet Another All-Encompassing JavaScript-heavy Framework. Tailwind-UI looks very interesting and I would have no problem paying for it, rather than getting a…

Semantic-UI is a perfect example of the atrophy that I fear with combined CSS and JS frameworks. I'm pretty bullish on utility-CSS (I prefer tachyons since it's much simpler than tailwind). I don't think frameworks should necessarily combine the JS and the CSS. Ideally you would have a competitive market of people selling themes, using utility-css components so you're not limited by framework, and then you can just u…

What's "utility-CSS"? Not having luck googling for it, not familiar with this stuff.

Re: Tailwind UI

#207

Post by ahallock »

mlcdf wrote: post #106
newfeatureok wrote: post #71

The problem with this IMO is that some enterprising person will just use regular tailwind (or another utility-css framework like tachyons) and re-implement all of these components and give it out for free, circumventing the license and killing the value of this. Normally with themes it would be time prohibitive to do so, but the nature of utility-css is that it's relatively straightforward to implement each component…

TailwindCSS is licenced under MIT so I dont' see how creating and selling components created with it could be seen as "circumventing the license". Tachyons is licenced under MIT too.

It's the specific combination of HTML and CSS. That's what you're paying for and that's what is licensed.

Re: Tailwind UI

#208

Post by ahallock »

wwweston wrote: post #149
pcurve wrote: post #36

On the surface, the markup is pretty damn awful. But if you reach certain level of proficiency, this will definitely speed up development. Back End Developer Personally I would prefer Bootstrap over this approach.

OK, this: ` Isn't this why we have CSS preprocessors? So we can do: .description-of-what-this-is { .lg_flex() .lg_items-center() .lg_justify_between(); } Assuming there's enough complexity beneath the mixins to justify their use -- some of these might just be CSS properties.

Just use view templates to capture this if you need to reuse.

Re: Tailwind UI

#209

Post by stanmancan »

newfeatureok wrote: post #71

The problem with this IMO is that some enterprising person will just use regular tailwind (or another utility-css framework like tachyons) and re-implement all of these components and give it out for free, circumventing the license and killing the value of this. Normally with themes it would be time prohibitive to do so, but the nature of utility-css is that it's relatively straightforward to implement each component…

Even if they sell 15,000 licenses in a year, that’s over a million dollars each. Not everything needs to be recurring revenue, they can make a truckload of money In a very short time span.

Re: Tailwind UI

#210

Post by stanmancan »

pcurve wrote: post #36

On the surface, the markup is pretty damn awful. But if you reach certain level of proficiency, this will definitely speed up development. Back End Developer Personally I would prefer Bootstrap over this approach.

Nobody likes the look of utility css frameworks, but once you use it, it’s tough to go back.
Post reply on HN