pjaoko

> Because many web sites and apps aren't as simple as "my first homepage" and don't only consist of first-party code.

CSS is there to style HTML tags. Yes, your complex webb app is dealing with a lot of third party code and whatnot... but CSS is just there to style your HTML tags. Why is it so hard to get that?

The point is, comparing CSS selectors to the functions or variables in other programming languages is silly, cause guess what... CSS actually has functions and variables!

So in your head, the analogy is not a big part of the argument? I'd accept your congrats, but I really have not earned it. The whole idea of comparing CSS to general purpose, Turing complete programming languages is surprisingly stupid. CSS has a very specific, narrow goal: styling HTML elements.

> Selectors are a global namespace. Imagine if every variable and function in your favorite programming languages were global and so had to be unique.

A selector is not not a variable or a function. CSS has functions (e.g translate) and it has variables, which are both distinct concepts in the language from selectors.

> No modules or namespaces. CSS is not supposed to be a turing complete general purpose programming language. Why would you need namespaces and modules to style up HTML tags?

> It is AI generated, then we would loose trust in that person

You are assuming that only you can generate fake AI videos of yourself.

Sorry but you're mixing up terms. A "web component library" would be something not compete with React, because React is a web component framework. The frameworks is whats used to build the component libraries e.g I think material design has one built on top of React.

> in which case you're limited to what that framework provides (and it won't be as robust as any non-wc framework).

Is there something inherently wrong with wc that stops robust frameworks being built on top of it? Have you tried actual framworks built on wc like Lit for example.

The question wasn't about which is harder, it was asking for proof.

Do you exist?

> maybe some things lie outside of the purview of empiricism and materialism

Maybe? So your whole premise is based on a maybe! It was a simple question, don't know where or how morality and behavior comes into play..

Has it been proven that it "likely isn't real"?

HTML5 refers specifically to the latest, living version of HTML, the markup language. CSS and JavaScript have their own specifications, and version numbers. The term your looking for is the web platform [1].

1. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Web_platform

Thats correct. Computer language is the top category. Markup and Programming languages are subcategories.

> CSS also sucks because 10px isn't 10 pixels, 10cm isn't 10 centimeters, and 50% isn't 50% of the screen.

This really isn't about CSS, it's about screen hardware - and the thousands of constantly evolving products in the market.

With the actual layout models, I see it more of an evolution thing. For someone starting on CSS today, you do not have to learn all 8 now if you don't want to, just master the grid. It was designed to be the last one to rule them all.

HTML (Hyper-Text Markup Language) is a specific kind programming language, a markup language. It is nowhere close to a general purpose (Turing complete) programming language. Maybe you meant the web stack (HTML, JavaScript, CSS)?

> If you like programming exclusively with globals and no warning when you have conflicting variable names

Tailwind is built on top of CSS. It is basically a library of hundreds of tiny "global", documented CSS classes.

> It's a source of stress to add a class to the system with a simple, short and readable name and have to worry it is used someplace else.

That is the whole point of CSS classes: re-use. A CSS class is not meant to be used in only one very specific place. For that, you can select an element's ID or an elements HTML path, to style just that one thing.

> Being an insane brand means literally nothing if people can trivially switch to competitors, which they can.

Logically speaking, yes it is easy to switch between OAI and Gemini, or Coke and Pepsi. But brand loyalty is more about emotions (comfort, familiarity,..) rather logical reasoning.

Completely agree. Readability is actually in the word itself read + ability. The ability of both the code and the reader.

you also get runtime bugs with rust and everything else, so i just don't get the "somehow better" line of comparison

> Rust's rich type system and ownership model will guarantee me memory-safety and thread-safety, which eliminate many classes of bugs at compile-time.

With PHP, you don't have to worry about compile-time bugs, because there is no compile time.

16 billion passwords from Apple, Facebook, Google and more leaked. Why has no one heard of it?

You have coding skills. Some marketing and video production skills. Self discipline and persistence. The time to spend 18hr days on a project. Why look for employment? Start your own business.

What is the difference between the DOM API, a JavaScript engine and the JS language specification?

Only if ed and Notepad are viable replacements for something like Notion or Obsidian.

A C build-once run-anywhere language, like Java, except it doesn't need an interpreter or virtual machine.

Going back to the original point, "the features they need, shipped promptly, and without bugs" you speak of is actually part of the UX (user experience)!

Maybe you are mixing up the UI design with the UX? In any case, the original point is just highlighting the importance of UX, without giving any solid examples of DX.

This is one of those "false delima" logical fallacies. The idea that you have to choose between a "nicer UI" and "many features, no bugs, shipped promptly".

All those are important, and given a talented team, there is absolutely no reason why you cannot have good UX, lots of features, few bugs shipped on time.

> Because users do not know that there's some hypothetical "better" experience they could have had and do not care, unless your service/tool/whatever is not functioning correctly.

If your business competitors prioritise UX over DX, your users will soon know. And then they won't be your users any more.