Re: [w3c/webcomponents] CSS Modules (#759)

IMO, that naming conflict should be resolved on the library side.

There is a well known case with ES2015+ related to certain `Array` methods names, changed because of Prototype.js reserved the originally suggested names, so that implementing them natively could break the thousands of sites.

Thankfully, this time we are talking about rebranding for a CSS authoring library. There are hundreds of those "tools-that-generate-unique-class-names-or-inline-styles" in React ecosystem. Why should we care about them?

I mean, if we give up on the name today, it might lead to consequences in future. 

PS: this proposal is not tightly coupled with Shadow DOM, so let's not expand anyone's objections against using it here.  

-- 
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
https://github.com/w3c/webcomponents/issues/759#issuecomment-520602129