Link
Embed
Share
Beginning
This slide
Copy link URL
Copy link URL
Copy iframe embed code
Copy iframe embed code
Copy javascript embed code
Copy javascript embed code
Share
Tweet
Share
Tweet
Slide 1
Slide 1 text
Why I like And don’t like Tailwind CSS.
Slide 2
Slide 2 text
Let’s see the concept of Tailwind
Slide 3
Slide 3 text
Link is in the description
Slide 4
Slide 4 text
1. Semantic CSS is bad Agree
Slide 5
Slide 5 text
don’t like this too.
Slide 6
Slide 6 text
2. We prefer composition over duplication. Agree
Slide 7
Slide 7 text
3. After several phases Utility CSS is the cure Agree
Slide 8
Slide 8 text
Much Better Than Semantics
Slide 9
Slide 9 text
4. Enforces consistency Yes, but we can also achieve this in another way
Slide 10
Slide 10 text
I agree on most of the claims Now is something I don’t
Slide 11
Slide 11 text
It is just a syntax issue, maybe true for pure HTML/CSS But not true for JavaScript Component
Slide 12
Slide 12 text
Tailwind is improved “inline style”
Slide 13
Slide 13 text
Tailwind doesn’t mention Its own cost of New Layer over CSS.
Slide 14
Slide 14 text
Tailwind adds new syntax to string (class name), new dialect to CSS, But you still needs to understand CSS, It is overwork not less.
Slide 15
Slide 15 text
I love the idea of “utility” But it is just an idea, CSS is not a must.
Slide 16
Slide 16 text
Why not just *give up* CSS? Like Flutter/SwiftUI
Slide 17
Slide 17 text
Atomic style Or Component style Elegantly declared!
Slide 18
Slide 18 text
Tailwind Just a rough Functional idea 1. No handy shorthand 2. Just JavaScript Function Syntax 3. don’t care about CSS
Slide 19
Slide 19 text
Declare only local styles With least effort. Let programs do the rest.
Slide 20
Slide 20 text
Parse Optimize Generate any CSS(even Tailwind) you want
Slide 21
Slide 21 text
Summary
Slide 22
Slide 22 text
Tailwind is on the right direction.
Slide 23
Slide 23 text
Good for HTML/CSS, But for JS components, It is not the fi nal cure.