XxX_MLG Noob_XxX
Is the `solid-element` library still being maintained?
Those are some helpful comparisons. Yeah I've only played a tiny bit with
solid-element and I quickly noticed the limitations of having to attaching things to the element instance (instead of being able to define them on the class directly).41 replies
Is the `solid-element` library still being maintained?
Those are a lot of helpful insights and resources! Thanks so much! I'll give Lume a look. I do like the idea of being able to skip a build step with Lit. But I think the dev team likes the idea of having something Solid-esque more. So Lume sounds potentially promising. If we do end up working with that tool, I'll probably end up having to ping you. 😅 So thanks for being willing to be spammed. (I won't actually spam you. lol. That would be bad. But I'll still ask questions. Haha.)
41 replies
Is the `solid-element` library still being maintained?
Well, there is no-such-thingI'm aware, though I can't tell if the declarative shadow DOM is supposed to help with that. I probably could've chosen my words better. The plan is to use some kind of tool to help with Web Components regardless, since it'll make the development faster and easier. It's just a question of what tool will help us accomplish our goals best.
41 replies
Is the `solid-element` library still being maintained?
Thanks for linking the articles. I think the difficult thing for us is that, ideally, we'd have a library of reusable components that work in any environment and that are more future proof. To my knowledge, the components we need wouldn't be doing anything too crazy either.
That seemed to be the use case that Ryan said WCs can be useful for, which I agree with. If we were building a full-on web app, we probably wouldn't be considering WCs. But because of the use case I mentioned, that's our focus. SSR WCs would also be desirable as long as it wouldn't require too much effort in userland.
41 replies