1) Web Components Aren't Supported By Browsers: True, only the newest ones support it, polyfill is no coverage at all. If you want a really Browser-support-table, use caniuse. This is the bull-shittiest visual ever made. Literally only the newest Firefox and Chrome have ok support, Safari and Opera have barely any support, Edge has no support whatsoever.
3 (Web Components Have No Way Of Templating)) You are using external libraries for this, so actually the answer is: Yes, but very badly and it really hasn't been decided where they want to go with this.
4 (SSR)) So you mean, not very good
5 (Web Components are a Proprietary Google Technology) and 6 (You Need Polymer to Use Web Components)) Ok, i don't see why you find these important enough to make em into 2 points, but true, you don't have to.
7 (You Need to Use HTML Imports)) Ok, you are not wrong
8 (You Need Frameworks to Write Apps)) Ok, but you do need support to write apps, and ios does not really support it (i know your totally colored table about said something else but that is fake). This is not a point for WC but just against framework-idiots.
9 (You Can't Use Web Components in Frameworks)) Ok
Point 5 - 9 are just extremely logical, frequently unrelated with WC.
10) Ok, would be a very mediocre framework then.
Myth: The Web Community Has Moved on From Web Components:
No, not at all, but it's still far far far away, don't use it for production. Also really look at caniuse and be shocked by the real support i.e. caniuse.com/#feat=custom-elementsv1
Sorry man, did not want to be negative but this article can be extremely toxic for our job world. Why can't you just use something stable.
Web Components supported by most of the modern browsers, and polyfill fill the gap for old ones, this concept allowed us running es2016 years ago, so why not using it? are you against babel? webpack?
Web Components aims to encapsulate state, functionality and DOM elements into one single module - truly MVC. who said it should allows you templating? you can build it via DOM api or other libraries.
I'm using Web Components inside my AngularJS old app, it works like a charm, boost the performance and made everything clean, testable and reusable.
So not agreeing is inappropriate, hmm, sorry not to be a part of your yes-sayers club.
Point one: Thx for defending me here because you will very clearly see that only html templates are completed, please use these yes
Point one is a very very bad one, first of all only the latest version of chrome and firefox is barely most of the modern browsers, because other browser don't support it or barely (don't look at this fake graph, look at caniuse).
There is seriously something wrong if you look at the web like that. I don't believe in graceful degradation.
Wow this got me so triggered.
1) Web Components Aren't Supported By Browsers: True, only the newest ones support it, polyfill is no coverage at all. If you want a really Browser-support-table, use caniuse. This is the bull-shittiest visual ever made. Literally only the newest Firefox and Chrome have ok support, Safari and Opera have barely any support, Edge has no support whatsoever.
2 (Web Components Can't Accept Complex Data)) Mmkay...
3 (Web Components Have No Way Of Templating)) You are using external libraries for this, so actually the answer is: Yes, but very badly and it really hasn't been decided where they want to go with this.
4 (SSR)) So you mean, not very good
5 (Web Components are a Proprietary Google Technology) and 6 (You Need Polymer to Use Web Components)) Ok, i don't see why you find these important enough to make em into 2 points, but true, you don't have to.
7 (You Need to Use HTML Imports)) Ok, you are not wrong
8 (You Need Frameworks to Write Apps)) Ok, but you do need support to write apps, and ios does not really support it (i know your totally colored table about said something else but that is fake). This is not a point for WC but just against framework-idiots.
9 (You Can't Use Web Components in Frameworks)) Ok
Point 5 - 9 are just extremely logical, frequently unrelated with WC.
10) Ok, would be a very mediocre framework then.
Myth: The Web Community Has Moved on From Web Components:
No, not at all, but it's still far far far away, don't use it for production. Also really look at caniuse and be shocked by the real support i.e. caniuse.com/#feat=custom-elementsv1
Sorry man, did not want to be negative but this article can be extremely toxic for our job world. Why can't you just use something stable.
Any selfrespecting webdeveloper would hold this site as it's only source: w3.org/standards/techs/components#...
Regardless the fact that your comments are inappropriate and I think you should be banned for that, most of your arguments are wrong or irrelevant.
Web Components status page on w3c: w3.org/standards/techs/components#... and spec: html.spec.whatwg.org/multipage/cus...
Web Components supported by most of the modern browsers, and polyfill fill the gap for old ones, this concept allowed us running es2016 years ago, so why not using it? are you against babel? webpack?
Web Components aims to encapsulate state, functionality and DOM elements into one single module - truly MVC. who said it should allows you templating? you can build it via DOM api or other libraries.
I'm using Web Components inside my AngularJS old app, it works like a charm, boost the performance and made everything clean, testable and reusable.
So not agreeing is inappropriate, hmm, sorry not to be a part of your yes-sayers club.
Point one: Thx for defending me here because you will very clearly see that only html templates are completed, please use these yes
Point one is a very very bad one, first of all only the latest version of chrome and firefox is barely most of the modern browsers, because other browser don't support it or barely (don't look at this fake graph, look at caniuse).
There is seriously something wrong if you look at the web like that. I don't believe in graceful degradation.
I did not find this an important point at all.
Lol Angular, ok 'nough said, nevermind.
Sounds like you are trolling for no reason..
So you apparently don't know what trolling means. Apparently not agreeing is trolling nowadays?