zarzz
Joined 7 years ago
Karma
23
Submissions
14
Member since
Feb 18
Recent submissions
Comment · 1 year ago
I've been checking out the Opennexus developers site and it's an interesting idea. The protocol is about making software development easier and more modular which can then be snaped together to build bigger and better things.. It's like building with blocks where each block is specific function or piece of data. You than connect these nodes to create anything. I dug into the playground mode and got sucked in to screwing around way longer than I intended.playground to experiment with nodes. It's clear that they're aiming to make development easier even for those who don't code. I only stoped playing cuz I have to go to work.
Comment · 7 years ago
As an example HN here on might structure things like this:
<script src="./hn-components.js"></script> <hn-header></hn-header> ... all the main body content ... <hn-footer></hn-footer>
To answer your direct question, the WC equivalent of <include> is the <script> tag. The <script> loads the component definition and all the resources related to them (See ZephJS for how this is super easy to do: https://gist.github.com/arei/8083a6270e704b830c68a2020f3e5e3...)
<hn-header> and <hn-footer> are defined in the script. They carry with them all the content, layout, and behavior for those parts of the site. This provides a nice clean separation between the page and the header and footer pieces. Changing the header or footer becomes just changing those parts. This is absolutely easier then using react or angular for the equivalent kind of things. Does it provide all that react/angular does, of course not. But it is infinitely cleaner then using either. Especially with ZephJS (gratuitous plug).
Comment · 7 years ago
If you are looking for just a simple load some html and replace this where my <include> tag is kind of thing you are right, nothing does that because it’s more complicated then that... what about the styles of the included html? What about the behaviors (JavaScript) for it. How does that translate with the include?
But, if you use Web Components, organize your code, and plan ahead, this is very doable today with Web Components. You just create say a <reddit-footer> component complete with style and behavior, and then drop that into your page html along with an import of the component definition. It’s clean and simple and the encapsulation of all your footer needs in one place is really nice.
ZephJS, the library I am promoting, or another Web Component engine, makes this even easier and allows your components to be bundle yup really nicely. ZephJS, for example, offers a cli bundler command that does this (via rollup) and it makes for a really clean component experience. https://gist.github.com/arei/8083a6270e704b830c68a2020f3e5e3...
B
Comment · 7 years ago
As others have already answered styling into Components is still hard, but there are answers coming soon with part/theme and Scoped Stylesheets.
Also, ZephJS, the Web Components library I am championing, has the ability to inherit from another ZephJS element which allows one to add to or even completely replace the styles for the new element without any special css magic. So if I want to style <acme-text-field> I simply inherit from it in my new <my-text-field> and I can style however I want.
https://gist.github.com/arei/8083a6270e704b830c68a2020f3e5e3...
Comment · 7 years ago
The reality of Web Components is that it was never intend to take share away from the large frameworks. Instead Web Components is intended to fill the middle ground between a simple web page and a full blown web application. There is a real need for web page developers to be able to just drop in a prebuilt web component and go without having to reach for the 10,000 pound gorilla of frameworks. That’s where Web Components can have real value, real benefit.
Is Web Components flawless, hardly. While the APIs are accepted standards and implemented in most browsers there are still a few holdouts, and to be sure there are still edges to iron out. No technology is without it warts, its awkward teen years. But Web Components is maturing and the tooling around it is maturing as well and Web Components most definitely has a place and is most definitely here to stay.
Also it is worth keeping in mind that the Web Component APIs are specifically written as low level APIs and intend to be built upon by libraries and frameworks to simplify and aid the process. Libraries like the one I am currently pitching, ZephJS [1], which aims at making writing and distributing web components mind numbingly simple to do. ZephJS is a perfect example of the new generation of Web Component libraries to facilitate answering the need I espouse above: the middle ground between basic and beast that so many web developers live in.
[1] Introducing ZephJS: https://gist.github.com/arei/8083a6270e704b830c68a2020f3e5e3...
Comment · 7 years ago
Allow me to float ZephJS at you as an example of a Web Component framework with a bundling tool to do what you describe. Simplifies everything about building Web Components.
Introduction: https://gist.github.com/arei/8083a6270e704b830c68a2020f3e5e3...
Bundling specifically: https://github.com/awesomeeng/zephjs/blob/master/docs/Compon...