Re: [w3ctag/design-reviews] Design questions around pay-for-what-you-use (#421)

This ties into the desire to make the web platform more approachable from a developer point of view, in multiple ways.

For instance, when a new developer is tasked to create an Android or iOS application for the first time, it is quite approachable in the sense that you can just follow the tutorials and use the builtin elements which covers most common use-cases. These platforms have a wider vocabulary of elements and utilities that gets you pretty far. That is not the case on the web where you need to create most from scratch or use frameworks.

Talking to enterprise companies, I have been hearing that that is a big issue when designing software that needs to last for years. Relying on multiple libraries brings challenges:

* What is the license?
* How is it maintained? Will we have to maintain it in a couple of years or migrate to something else?
* What other dependencies does it have? Is it safe? Will it pull in other deps in the future behind my back?

Angular seems to be particular popular in the Enterprise because it comes with 'all batteries included' and everything is under the same license and maintenance model, thus easier for companies to deal with.

Broadening the web platform with more specific elements without making non-users pay for it seems like a valuable goal, but it is also super important that these new elements have gotten battle tested and used by actual users (feedback loop).

I assume that that is part of the idea with built-in modules and import maps, because users can start using a polyfilled version (maybe even versioned) that is being developed together with the spec and when/if these prove good and popular (look at usage?) then can be upgraded to become part of HTML or similar standards.



-- 
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
https://github.com/w3ctag/design-reviews/issues/421#issuecomment-530703297