Recent searches
Search options
I've heard all this praise for Tailwind CSS and when I finally look into what it actually is I find out it's a framework for doing inline styles but using class names instead.
Hmm.
I mean I bet Tailwind is a nice way of writing inline styles but also I really don't vibe with writing inline styles. Traditional, semantic CSS with class names describing what it *is* instead of how it *looks* is so much more pleasant for me to read.
Long strings of Tailwind classes reminds me of div soup.
I am inclined to work closer to native HTML and CSS where I can. It's what actually renders in the browser, it's what all frameworks are built on top of, it's tech that will survive a thousand hype cycles, and it's usually possible to write simpler code in it.
Opting to place an abstraction layer of utility CSS classes between me and the actual CSS puts me off.
@cvennevik Have a play with Kitten if you have some time. It’s based on the same philosophy (with some peer-to-peer Small Web stuff baked in). Would love to hear your thoughts on how close it gets and/or what might be improved :)
@aral Oh I do want to check this out. Not sure I have the right use for the tech but I'm so charmed by the packaging.
@aral Kittens!
