Danny Engelman 🌷🏍️🛥️
@engelman.nl
I do modern Web Component Development with technologies supported by **all** WHATWG partners (Apple, Google, Microsoft & Mozilla)
👨🏻💻TRS-80 Scriptkiddie '79+
🎓 Computer Science '87 - '92
❤️ Online since 1990 yes! 1990 I started with Email and Gopher
👨🏻💻TRS-80 Scriptkiddie '79+
🎓 Computer Science '87 - '92
❤️ Online since 1990 yes! 1990 I started with Email and Gopher
> "with Lit", yeah - unless you're looking to punish yourself,
> you're not building anything serious without a framework 😅
So if vanilla is C and Lit is C++
Why are (some) people still using C ?
I do vanilla only (and steal the good parts from Lit)
> you're not building anything serious without a framework 😅
So if vanilla is C and Lit is C++
Why are (some) people still using C ?
I do vanilla only (and steal the good parts from Lit)
November 27, 2025 at 11:05 AM
> "with Lit", yeah - unless you're looking to punish yourself,
> you're not building anything serious without a framework 😅
So if vanilla is C and Lit is C++
Why are (some) people still using C ?
I do vanilla only (and steal the good parts from Lit)
> you're not building anything serious without a framework 😅
So if vanilla is C and Lit is C++
Why are (some) people still using C ?
I do vanilla only (and steal the good parts from Lit)
Looks great,
But isn't this like saying you have a cute cousin,
and we are not allowed to date him?
where's the demo?
But isn't this like saying you have a cute cousin,
and we are not allowed to date him?
where's the demo?
November 25, 2025 at 8:53 AM
Looks great,
But isn't this like saying you have a cute cousin,
and we are not allowed to date him?
where's the demo?
But isn't this like saying you have a cute cousin,
and we are not allowed to date him?
where's the demo?
salt...
Lit IMHO, is a framework,
because it frames you into using HTML
I don't use HTML, I use document.createElement
its faster, no salt
Lit IMHO, is a framework,
because it frames you into using HTML
I don't use HTML, I use document.createElement
its faster, no salt
November 22, 2025 at 12:37 PM
salt...
Lit IMHO, is a framework,
because it frames you into using HTML
I don't use HTML, I use document.createElement
its faster, no salt
Lit IMHO, is a framework,
because it frames you into using HTML
I don't use HTML, I use document.createElement
its faster, no salt
Analyzing (undocumented) libraries used to take some time.
With AI its just "explain this code"
With AI its just "explain this code"
November 22, 2025 at 12:18 PM
Analyzing (undocumented) libraries used to take some time.
With AI its just "explain this code"
With AI its just "explain this code"
I need salt
I explore salt content in Lib X
I need less or more salt
I take/copy salt from Lib X
[1 year later] My own library still has the correct amount of salt
Lib X adds pepper
I only copy half the pepper
[5 years later] My own library is still to my own taste
My code runs with 0 dependencies
I explore salt content in Lib X
I need less or more salt
I take/copy salt from Lib X
[1 year later] My own library still has the correct amount of salt
Lib X adds pepper
I only copy half the pepper
[5 years later] My own library is still to my own taste
My code runs with 0 dependencies
November 22, 2025 at 12:12 PM
I need salt
I explore salt content in Lib X
I need less or more salt
I take/copy salt from Lib X
[1 year later] My own library still has the correct amount of salt
Lib X adds pepper
I only copy half the pepper
[5 years later] My own library is still to my own taste
My code runs with 0 dependencies
I explore salt content in Lib X
I need less or more salt
I take/copy salt from Lib X
[1 year later] My own library still has the correct amount of salt
Lib X adds pepper
I only copy half the pepper
[5 years later] My own library is still to my own taste
My code runs with 0 dependencies
But the fun?
I can buy a soup-starter in the supermarket;
or I can buy vegetables and make my own stock.
You can never take the salt out
I can buy a soup-starter in the supermarket;
or I can buy vegetables and make my own stock.
You can never take the salt out
November 21, 2025 at 1:50 PM
But the fun?
I can buy a soup-starter in the supermarket;
or I can buy vegetables and make my own stock.
You can never take the salt out
I can buy a soup-starter in the supermarket;
or I can buy vegetables and make my own stock.
You can never take the salt out
The CSS psuedo class :state is not that well known;
but needs JS code in the Web Component
developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/W...
but needs JS code in the Web Component
developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/W...
:state() - CSS | MDN
The :state() CSS pseudo-class matches custom elements that have the specified custom state.
developer.mozilla.org
November 21, 2025 at 1:42 PM
The CSS psuedo class :state is not that well known;
but needs JS code in the Web Component
developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/W...
but needs JS code in the Web Component
developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/W...
I almost always write an Anonymous class:
𝙘𝙪𝙨𝙩𝙤𝙢𝙀𝙡𝙚𝙢𝙚𝙣𝙩𝙨.𝙙𝙚𝙛𝙞𝙣𝙚(
'𝙢𝙮-𝙘𝙤𝙢𝙥',
𝙘𝙡𝙖𝙨𝙨 𝙚𝙭𝙩𝙚𝙣𝙙𝙨 𝙃𝙏𝙈𝙇𝙀𝙡𝙚𝙢𝙚𝙣𝙩 { // anonymous class
...
});
since you hardly ever need that (bloated) Named Exported class
Maybe never, since 𝙘𝙪𝙨𝙩𝙤𝙢𝙀𝙡𝙚𝙢𝙚𝙣𝙩𝙨.𝙜𝙚𝙩('𝙢𝙮-𝙘𝙤𝙢𝙥')
gets you that anonymous class
𝙘𝙪𝙨𝙩𝙤𝙢𝙀𝙡𝙚𝙢𝙚𝙣𝙩𝙨.𝙙𝙚𝙛𝙞𝙣𝙚(
'𝙢𝙮-𝙘𝙤𝙢𝙥',
𝙘𝙡𝙖𝙨𝙨 𝙚𝙭𝙩𝙚𝙣𝙙𝙨 𝙃𝙏𝙈𝙇𝙀𝙡𝙚𝙢𝙚𝙣𝙩 { // anonymous class
...
});
since you hardly ever need that (bloated) Named Exported class
Maybe never, since 𝙘𝙪𝙨𝙩𝙤𝙢𝙀𝙡𝙚𝙢𝙚𝙣𝙩𝙨.𝙜𝙚𝙩('𝙢𝙮-𝙘𝙤𝙢𝙥')
gets you that anonymous class
November 21, 2025 at 9:25 AM
I almost always write an Anonymous class:
𝙘𝙪𝙨𝙩𝙤𝙢𝙀𝙡𝙚𝙢𝙚𝙣𝙩𝙨.𝙙𝙚𝙛𝙞𝙣𝙚(
'𝙢𝙮-𝙘𝙤𝙢𝙥',
𝙘𝙡𝙖𝙨𝙨 𝙚𝙭𝙩𝙚𝙣𝙙𝙨 𝙃𝙏𝙈𝙇𝙀𝙡𝙚𝙢𝙚𝙣𝙩 { // anonymous class
...
});
since you hardly ever need that (bloated) Named Exported class
Maybe never, since 𝙘𝙪𝙨𝙩𝙤𝙢𝙀𝙡𝙚𝙢𝙚𝙣𝙩𝙨.𝙜𝙚𝙩('𝙢𝙮-𝙘𝙤𝙢𝙥')
gets you that anonymous class
𝙘𝙪𝙨𝙩𝙤𝙢𝙀𝙡𝙚𝙢𝙚𝙣𝙩𝙨.𝙙𝙚𝙛𝙞𝙣𝙚(
'𝙢𝙮-𝙘𝙤𝙢𝙥',
𝙘𝙡𝙖𝙨𝙨 𝙚𝙭𝙩𝙚𝙣𝙙𝙨 𝙃𝙏𝙈𝙇𝙀𝙡𝙚𝙢𝙚𝙣𝙩 { // anonymous class
...
});
since you hardly ever need that (bloated) Named Exported class
Maybe never, since 𝙘𝙪𝙨𝙩𝙤𝙢𝙀𝙡𝙚𝙢𝙚𝙣𝙩𝙨.𝙜𝙚𝙩('𝙢𝙮-𝙘𝙤𝙢𝙥')
gets you that anonymous class
Great intro video,
can you type 120 keys per second?
can you type 120 keys per second?
November 20, 2025 at 11:23 AM
Great intro video,
can you type 120 keys per second?
can you type 120 keys per second?
> Is a web component?
open to debate...
Used WITHOUT using JS, it is a UNDEFINED Custom Element.
ANY with a dash IS a valid HTMLElement
perfectly valid to use and style with CSS
Some say only JS created DEFINED Custom Elements are Web Components.
dashed-html.github.io
open to debate...
Used WITHOUT using JS, it is a UNDEFINED Custom Element.
ANY
perfectly valid to use and style with CSS
Some say only JS created DEFINED Custom Elements are Web Components.
dashed-html.github.io
dashed-html.github.io
November 19, 2025 at 7:52 PM
> Is a web component?
open to debate...
Used WITHOUT using JS, it is a UNDEFINED Custom Element.
ANY with a dash IS a valid HTMLElement
perfectly valid to use and style with CSS
Some say only JS created DEFINED Custom Elements are Web Components.
dashed-html.github.io
open to debate...
Used WITHOUT using JS, it is a UNDEFINED Custom Element.
ANY
perfectly valid to use and style with CSS
Some say only JS created DEFINED Custom Elements are Web Components.
dashed-html.github.io
AI made it myself!
November 16, 2025 at 11:02 AM
AI made it myself!
> Web components are just objects
I would say they are JUST DOM ELEMENTS.
The only difference between <video> and <my-web-component>
is the former is written by a Browser vendor
They are both Web Components
Questioning if WCs work with Frameworks is questioning if <video> works in Frameworks.
I would say they are JUST DOM ELEMENTS.
The only difference between <video> and <my-web-component>
is the former is written by a Browser vendor
They are both Web Components
Questioning if WCs work with Frameworks is questioning if <video> works in Frameworks.
November 13, 2025 at 10:04 AM
> Web components are just objects
I would say they are JUST DOM ELEMENTS.
The only difference between <video> and <my-web-component>
is the former is written by a Browser vendor
They are both Web Components
Questioning if WCs work with Frameworks is questioning if <video> works in Frameworks.
I would say they are JUST DOM ELEMENTS.
The only difference between <video> and <my-web-component>
is the former is written by a Browser vendor
They are both Web Components
Questioning if WCs work with Frameworks is questioning if <video> works in Frameworks.
*REPLACING* the shadowRoot is notable behavior
You can replace an existing shadowRoot on a DSD, either on a regular DOM element or on a Custom Element once
Any more tries cause:
𝘍𝘢𝘪𝘭𝘦𝘥 𝘵𝘰 𝘦𝘹𝘦𝘤𝘶𝘵𝘦 '𝘢𝘵𝘵𝘢𝘤𝘩𝘚𝘩𝘢𝘥𝘰𝘸' 𝘰𝘯 '𝘌𝘭𝘦𝘮𝘦𝘯𝘵': 𝘚𝘩𝘢𝘥𝘰𝘸 𝘳𝘰𝘰𝘵 𝘤𝘢𝘯𝘯𝘰𝘵 𝘣𝘦 𝘤𝘳𝘦𝘢𝘵𝘦𝘥 𝘰𝘯 𝘢 𝘩𝘰𝘴𝘵 𝘸𝘩𝘪𝘤𝘩 𝘢𝘭𝘳𝘦𝘢𝘥𝘺 𝘩𝘰𝘴𝘵𝘴 𝘢 𝘴𝘩𝘢𝘥𝘰𝘸 𝘵𝘳𝘦𝘦
You can replace an existing shadowRoot on a DSD, either on a regular DOM element or on a Custom Element once
Any more tries cause:
𝘍𝘢𝘪𝘭𝘦𝘥 𝘵𝘰 𝘦𝘹𝘦𝘤𝘶𝘵𝘦 '𝘢𝘵𝘵𝘢𝘤𝘩𝘚𝘩𝘢𝘥𝘰𝘸' 𝘰𝘯 '𝘌𝘭𝘦𝘮𝘦𝘯𝘵': 𝘚𝘩𝘢𝘥𝘰𝘸 𝘳𝘰𝘰𝘵 𝘤𝘢𝘯𝘯𝘰𝘵 𝘣𝘦 𝘤𝘳𝘦𝘢𝘵𝘦𝘥 𝘰𝘯 𝘢 𝘩𝘰𝘴𝘵 𝘸𝘩𝘪𝘤𝘩 𝘢𝘭𝘳𝘦𝘢𝘥𝘺 𝘩𝘰𝘴𝘵𝘴 𝘢 𝘴𝘩𝘢𝘥𝘰𝘸 𝘵𝘳𝘦𝘦
November 13, 2025 at 9:52 AM
*REPLACING* the shadowRoot is notable behavior
You can replace an existing shadowRoot on a DSD, either on a regular DOM element or on a Custom Element once
Any more tries cause:
𝘍𝘢𝘪𝘭𝘦𝘥 𝘵𝘰 𝘦𝘹𝘦𝘤𝘶𝘵𝘦 '𝘢𝘵𝘵𝘢𝘤𝘩𝘚𝘩𝘢𝘥𝘰𝘸' 𝘰𝘯 '𝘌𝘭𝘦𝘮𝘦𝘯𝘵': 𝘚𝘩𝘢𝘥𝘰𝘸 𝘳𝘰𝘰𝘵 𝘤𝘢𝘯𝘯𝘰𝘵 𝘣𝘦 𝘤𝘳𝘦𝘢𝘵𝘦𝘥 𝘰𝘯 𝘢 𝘩𝘰𝘴𝘵 𝘸𝘩𝘪𝘤𝘩 𝘢𝘭𝘳𝘦𝘢𝘥𝘺 𝘩𝘰𝘴𝘵𝘴 𝘢 𝘴𝘩𝘢𝘥𝘰𝘸 𝘵𝘳𝘦𝘦
You can replace an existing shadowRoot on a DSD, either on a regular DOM element or on a Custom Element once
Any more tries cause:
𝘍𝘢𝘪𝘭𝘦𝘥 𝘵𝘰 𝘦𝘹𝘦𝘤𝘶𝘵𝘦 '𝘢𝘵𝘵𝘢𝘤𝘩𝘚𝘩𝘢𝘥𝘰𝘸' 𝘰𝘯 '𝘌𝘭𝘦𝘮𝘦𝘯𝘵': 𝘚𝘩𝘢𝘥𝘰𝘸 𝘳𝘰𝘰𝘵 𝘤𝘢𝘯𝘯𝘰𝘵 𝘣𝘦 𝘤𝘳𝘦𝘢𝘵𝘦𝘥 𝘰𝘯 𝘢 𝘩𝘰𝘴𝘵 𝘸𝘩𝘪𝘤𝘩 𝘢𝘭𝘳𝘦𝘢𝘥𝘺 𝘩𝘰𝘴𝘵𝘴 𝘢 𝘴𝘩𝘢𝘥𝘰𝘸 𝘵𝘳𝘦𝘦
Isn't it like doing:
𝘷𝘢𝘳 𝘈 = 1
𝘷𝘢𝘳 𝘈 = 2
𝘤𝘰𝘯𝘴𝘰𝘭𝘦.𝘭𝘰𝘨( 𝘈 )
Same applies for:
<𝘤𝘶𝘴𝘵𝘰𝘮-𝘦𝘭𝘦𝘮𝘦𝘯𝘵>
<𝘵𝘦𝘮𝘱𝘭𝘢𝘵𝘦 𝘴𝘩𝘢𝘥𝘰𝘸𝘳𝘰𝘰𝘵𝘮𝘰𝘥𝘦="𝘰𝘱𝘦𝘯">
𝘐 𝘢𝘮 𝘊𝘶𝘴𝘵𝘰𝘮 𝘌𝘭𝘦𝘮𝘦𝘯𝘵 𝘴𝘩𝘢𝘥𝘰𝘸𝘙𝘰𝘰𝘵 𝘤𝘰𝘯𝘵𝘦𝘯𝘵
</𝘵𝘦𝘮𝘱𝘭𝘢𝘵𝘦>
</𝘤𝘶𝘴𝘵𝘰𝘮-𝘦𝘭𝘦𝘮𝘦𝘯𝘵>
When you upgrade it AND run attachShadow AGAIN
𝘷𝘢𝘳 𝘈 = 1
𝘷𝘢𝘳 𝘈 = 2
𝘤𝘰𝘯𝘴𝘰𝘭𝘦.𝘭𝘰𝘨( 𝘈 )
Same applies for:
<𝘤𝘶𝘴𝘵𝘰𝘮-𝘦𝘭𝘦𝘮𝘦𝘯𝘵>
<𝘵𝘦𝘮𝘱𝘭𝘢𝘵𝘦 𝘴𝘩𝘢𝘥𝘰𝘸𝘳𝘰𝘰𝘵𝘮𝘰𝘥𝘦="𝘰𝘱𝘦𝘯">
𝘐 𝘢𝘮 𝘊𝘶𝘴𝘵𝘰𝘮 𝘌𝘭𝘦𝘮𝘦𝘯𝘵 𝘴𝘩𝘢𝘥𝘰𝘸𝘙𝘰𝘰𝘵 𝘤𝘰𝘯𝘵𝘦𝘯𝘵
</𝘵𝘦𝘮𝘱𝘭𝘢𝘵𝘦>
</𝘤𝘶𝘴𝘵𝘰𝘮-𝘦𝘭𝘦𝘮𝘦𝘯𝘵>
When you upgrade it AND run attachShadow AGAIN
November 13, 2025 at 9:49 AM
Isn't it like doing:
𝘷𝘢𝘳 𝘈 = 1
𝘷𝘢𝘳 𝘈 = 2
𝘤𝘰𝘯𝘴𝘰𝘭𝘦.𝘭𝘰𝘨( 𝘈 )
Same applies for:
<𝘤𝘶𝘴𝘵𝘰𝘮-𝘦𝘭𝘦𝘮𝘦𝘯𝘵>
<𝘵𝘦𝘮𝘱𝘭𝘢𝘵𝘦 𝘴𝘩𝘢𝘥𝘰𝘸𝘳𝘰𝘰𝘵𝘮𝘰𝘥𝘦="𝘰𝘱𝘦𝘯">
𝘐 𝘢𝘮 𝘊𝘶𝘴𝘵𝘰𝘮 𝘌𝘭𝘦𝘮𝘦𝘯𝘵 𝘴𝘩𝘢𝘥𝘰𝘸𝘙𝘰𝘰𝘵 𝘤𝘰𝘯𝘵𝘦𝘯𝘵
</𝘵𝘦𝘮𝘱𝘭𝘢𝘵𝘦>
</𝘤𝘶𝘴𝘵𝘰𝘮-𝘦𝘭𝘦𝘮𝘦𝘯𝘵>
When you upgrade it AND run attachShadow AGAIN
𝘷𝘢𝘳 𝘈 = 1
𝘷𝘢𝘳 𝘈 = 2
𝘤𝘰𝘯𝘴𝘰𝘭𝘦.𝘭𝘰𝘨( 𝘈 )
Same applies for:
<𝘤𝘶𝘴𝘵𝘰𝘮-𝘦𝘭𝘦𝘮𝘦𝘯𝘵>
<𝘵𝘦𝘮𝘱𝘭𝘢𝘵𝘦 𝘴𝘩𝘢𝘥𝘰𝘸𝘳𝘰𝘰𝘵𝘮𝘰𝘥𝘦="𝘰𝘱𝘦𝘯">
𝘐 𝘢𝘮 𝘊𝘶𝘴𝘵𝘰𝘮 𝘌𝘭𝘦𝘮𝘦𝘯𝘵 𝘴𝘩𝘢𝘥𝘰𝘸𝘙𝘰𝘰𝘵 𝘤𝘰𝘯𝘵𝘦𝘯𝘵
</𝘵𝘦𝘮𝘱𝘭𝘢𝘵𝘦>
</𝘤𝘶𝘴𝘵𝘰𝘮-𝘦𝘭𝘦𝘮𝘦𝘯𝘵>
When you upgrade it AND run attachShadow AGAIN
Yes, modules loads late...
But no one really cares, a good Lit site can still load fast, and with a fade-in animation after :not(:defined) { display:none } FOUCs still occur but won't be seen.
I don't do Lit, only do native, I am that crazy farmer that doesn't use pesticides.
But no one really cares, a good Lit site can still load fast, and with a fade-in animation after :not(:defined) { display:none } FOUCs still occur but won't be seen.
I don't do Lit, only do native, I am that crazy farmer that doesn't use pesticides.
November 7, 2025 at 5:32 PM
Yes, modules loads late...
But no one really cares, a good Lit site can still load fast, and with a fade-in animation after :not(:defined) { display:none } FOUCs still occur but won't be seen.
I don't do Lit, only do native, I am that crazy farmer that doesn't use pesticides.
But no one really cares, a good Lit site can still load fast, and with a fade-in animation after :not(:defined) { display:none } FOUCs still occur but won't be seen.
I don't do Lit, only do native, I am that crazy farmer that doesn't use pesticides.
jsfiddle.net/WebComponent...
open the F12 console !!
The simulates
![]()
![]()
open the F12 console !!
The
The <tag-name> connectedCallback fires on the *opening* <tag-name> tag, so there is no (light)DOM parsed yet.
November 7, 2025 at 12:23 PM
The <tag-name> connectedCallback fires on the *opening* <tag-name> tag, so there is no (light)DOM parsed yet.
No LS and FOUCs when Web Components are defined *before* DOM is parsed, ie. loaded in the <head>
Alas most developers load Web Components with defer or as module; executing them the (good) old jQuery (and most Frameworks) way;
parse DOM then replace it with some other DOM.... LS and FOUCs galore.
Alas most developers load Web Components with defer or as module; executing them the (good) old jQuery (and most Frameworks) way;
parse DOM then replace it with some other DOM.... LS and FOUCs galore.
November 7, 2025 at 10:08 AM
No LS and FOUCs when Web Components are defined *before* DOM is parsed, ie. loaded in the <head>
Alas most developers load Web Components with defer or as module; executing them the (good) old jQuery (and most Frameworks) way;
parse DOM then replace it with some other DOM.... LS and FOUCs galore.
Alas most developers load Web Components with defer or as module; executing them the (good) old jQuery (and most Frameworks) way;
parse DOM then replace it with some other DOM.... LS and FOUCs galore.
> too lazy
Its dumping your code into ONE connectedCallback method and fixing some DOM creation
Took me maybe 10 minutes
I then refactored it, still as an experiment keeping all code in ONE Method
But mainly focussing on my own Web Components displaying a starter page
HTH
image-reveal.github.io
Its dumping your code into ONE connectedCallback method and fixing some DOM creation
Took me maybe 10 minutes
I then refactored it, still as an experiment keeping all code in ONE Method
But mainly focussing on my own Web Components displaying a starter page
HTH
image-reveal.github.io
November 5, 2025 at 12:02 PM
> too lazy
Its dumping your code into ONE connectedCallback method and fixing some DOM creation
Took me maybe 10 minutes
I then refactored it, still as an experiment keeping all code in ONE Method
But mainly focussing on my own Web Components displaying a starter page
HTH
image-reveal.github.io
Its dumping your code into ONE connectedCallback method and fixing some DOM creation
Took me maybe 10 minutes
I then refactored it, still as an experiment keeping all code in ONE Method
But mainly focussing on my own Web Components displaying a starter page
HTH
image-reveal.github.io
#4 ??
UNdefined Custom Elements do not require JavaScript.
Since a long time ANY with a dash IS a valid HTMLElement, NOT! HTMLUnknownElement as some gurus and AI claim.
That means you can use meaningful and only CSS to replace the DIV soup.
dashed-html.github.io
UNdefined Custom Elements do not require JavaScript.
Since a long time ANY
That means you can use meaningful
dashed-html.github.io
dashed-html.github.io
November 4, 2025 at 9:14 AM
#4 ??
UNdefined Custom Elements do not require JavaScript.
Since a long time ANY with a dash IS a valid HTMLElement, NOT! HTMLUnknownElement as some gurus and AI claim.
That means you can use meaningful and only CSS to replace the DIV soup.
dashed-html.github.io
UNdefined Custom Elements do not require JavaScript.
Since a long time ANY
That means you can use meaningful
dashed-html.github.io
OK, I continued reading, and stopped again when you played the NO JavaScript card.
75% of the World Population can't read English.
So with 14% you are better of translating your site to Mandarin, than the 0.2% that can't "read" JavaScript.
75% of the World Population can't read English.
So with 14% you are better of translating your site to Mandarin, than the 0.2% that can't "read" JavaScript.
November 3, 2025 at 8:07 PM
OK, I continued reading, and stopped again when you played the NO JavaScript card.
75% of the World Population can't read English.
So with 14% you are better of translating your site to Mandarin, than the 0.2% that can't "read" JavaScript.
75% of the World Population can't read English.
So with 14% you are better of translating your site to Mandarin, than the 0.2% that can't "read" JavaScript.
I stopped reading when you chanted the 10 year old <template> mantra. No need for a <template> at all in your example.
November 3, 2025 at 6:24 PM
I stopped reading when you chanted the 10 year old <template> mantra. No need for a <template> at all in your example.
> 99.8% of web users have JS enabled.
> How much time should I devote to that 0.2%?
Maybe a wake-up call for you Muricans;
75% of the World Population can NOT read English...
So what IS your 𝒍𝒂𝒏𝒈𝒖𝒂𝒈𝒆 priority?
More Mandarin (14%) or less JavaScript (0.2%)?
> How much time should I devote to that 0.2%?
Maybe a wake-up call for you Muricans;
75% of the World Population can NOT read English...
So what IS your 𝒍𝒂𝒏𝒈𝒖𝒂𝒈𝒆 priority?
More Mandarin (14%) or less JavaScript (0.2%)?
November 2, 2025 at 9:53 AM
> 99.8% of web users have JS enabled.
> How much time should I devote to that 0.2%?
Maybe a wake-up call for you Muricans;
75% of the World Population can NOT read English...
So what IS your 𝒍𝒂𝒏𝒈𝒖𝒂𝒈𝒆 priority?
More Mandarin (14%) or less JavaScript (0.2%)?
> How much time should I devote to that 0.2%?
Maybe a wake-up call for you Muricans;
75% of the World Population can NOT read English...
So what IS your 𝒍𝒂𝒏𝒈𝒖𝒂𝒈𝒆 priority?
More Mandarin (14%) or less JavaScript (0.2%)?
Carcassonne is easier with a rotating fixed size square layout in a CSS grid, where rows and columns are added Top-Bottom-Left-Right
Dominos probably requires masonry (not supported in a browser yet)
Maybe next weeks team Web Component challenge; we did Ludo once; all NAMED slots and CSS grid-area
Dominos probably requires masonry (not supported in a browser yet)
Maybe next weeks team Web Component challenge; we did Ludo once; all NAMED slots and CSS grid-area
October 31, 2025 at 4:29 PM
Carcassonne is easier with a rotating fixed size square layout in a CSS grid, where rows and columns are added Top-Bottom-Left-Right
Dominos probably requires masonry (not supported in a browser yet)
Maybe next weeks team Web Component challenge; we did Ludo once; all NAMED slots and CSS grid-area
Dominos probably requires masonry (not supported in a browser yet)
Maybe next weeks team Web Component challenge; we did Ludo once; all NAMED slots and CSS grid-area
English
300
Connect Bluesky
Enter your Bluesky handle and app password to unlock posting, likes, and your Following feed.
Need an app password? Open Bluesky, go to Settings > App passwords, and create a new one.
Connect with Bluesky
Sign in with your Bluesky account to unlock posting, likes, and your Following feed.