And don't get me wrong, I don't necessarily want everything absolute positioned. I just find it amusing when people try to get a badge or some such on something and then herculean efforts they will go through to get that badge exactly where they want it.
So, with bluesky, the amount of markup that goes into the footer menu of each post would be what I'm looking at. Tools were clearly used to get styles such as "css-g5y9jx" and this isn't the worst examples I've seen. But I am curious on why so many nested divs seem to be needed all of the time.
I am not clear what you mean by canvas-like approach? I think folks should still use elements. Just fewer of them, all told.
Direct to my claim, though; my argument is just that templates/designs are visual things. I don't think people are thinking in terms of nested div elements. They largely don't even think of sections of their template as parent/child relationships. They have a visual thing and want it filled in with whatever data.
The badge on something is a good example for using absolute positioning exactly for what it's meant for imho.
With "canvas-like approach", I meant this part of your comment (not the web technology):
> Basically, my assertion used to be to draw out what you have in mind on grid paper.
I guess we were talking past each other because you equate templates and designs, and I didn't think of this usage of the term (the post also is not about this).
Templating is not necessarily for full pages always, that defeats the purpose of templating languages in the first place to me.
> Direct to my claim, though; my argument is just that templates/designs are visual things. I don't think people are thinking in terms of nested div elements.
Agree. And using modern CSS is a great way to reduce the number of "div"s.
> But I am curious on why so many nested divs seem to be needed all of the time.
I fought many these battles in my jobs, and often it's just for flexibility, because different components are written in a modular fashion.
Minimizing the DOM tree size is my goal too, but often the version with less nesting requires a bit more thinking and breaks more easily when elements are added or changed.
CSS gris vs nesting flex containers is a great example for that.
Other times it's just laziness / people don't care.
Another poster was pointing out that this is not necessarily what is meant by templates in the post. I can see the distinction, but not really sure it changes my view. Since the post is largely more javascript literals for dom objects, it is hard for me not to bring that back to the design implications? Literally comes back to "people love JSX" many times. Why? Because it lets them get things to the presentation layer that is their browser.
I took some time to dive into how extensive JavaScript has made the word template in their world. I confess it reads a bit excessive to me. More than a bit, really. Tagged templates, in particular, look like one of the biggest foot guns I've ever seen.
I took it to design because I don't know of any other real reason to template the DOM other than for design purposes. Indeed, reading on the linked proposal, this is to make reactive things on a page. And that will have to be married to a design at some point. Often the entire point of introducing names that are exported from data to a rendered document is for the presentation implications of it. Otherwise, you'd just output the data?
I'm not sure if I can contribute anything more here.
Tagged template literals, aka "template string literals" are yet another technology adjacent to JS and HTML using the word "template". But it doesn't have much to do with the submission.
It's just a fancy name for advanced string interpolation in JS, and has no inherent connection to DOM elements or fragments.
But it is used by some technologies such as styled-components and Lit (the web component library).
styled-components is probably also where the obfuscated CSS-in-JS class names in the bluesky markup originate.
There is also a `<template>` element that is used by ShadowDOM and web components.
But nothing of that is the essence of the post, these are just things that coincidentally use the word "template" (and, less coincidentally, the concept).
As far as I see, it is about the wish to standardize declarative data-binding to DOM trees.
Basically, a React-like API built into the browser, but less detached from native rendering algorithms.
I only mentioned tagged template literals, as they were called out by the article as an unsung hero. Presumably, they are an example of what a good template language looks like. If so, they don't give me hope that we know what a good template language looks like.
The idea of the post seems to be encapsulated in the web components issue and discussion. Agreed that it looks largely about data binding to DOM trees. To paraphrase you, "seems like advanced DOM interpolation in JS." Which, I just can't bring myself to agree that this looks good. Happy to be proven wrong in time.
The nested divs in modern markup are just signs of lazy bone headed devs. I’m constantly removing them from our own app because with either grid or flex box layout in the browser is stupid easy. Haven’t even been tempted to use the old tricks like floats or absolute positioning in years and years.
And don't get me wrong, I don't necessarily want everything absolute positioned. I just find it amusing when people try to get a badge or some such on something and then herculean efforts they will go through to get that badge exactly where they want it.
So, with bluesky, the amount of markup that goes into the footer menu of each post would be what I'm looking at. Tools were clearly used to get styles such as "css-g5y9jx" and this isn't the worst examples I've seen. But I am curious on why so many nested divs seem to be needed all of the time.
I am not clear what you mean by canvas-like approach? I think folks should still use elements. Just fewer of them, all told.
Direct to my claim, though; my argument is just that templates/designs are visual things. I don't think people are thinking in terms of nested div elements. They largely don't even think of sections of their template as parent/child relationships. They have a visual thing and want it filled in with whatever data.