[Feature Request] Lack of clarity on why some components are not included in lion #711
Replies: 2 comments
-
Perhaps because I had (childishly) always looked for WCs as the solution to any problem, and because of my familiarity with Vaadin Grid, I already had my options “set” in this direction. |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
Here is some guidance that also includes javascript as part of the solution. Including it here only to further along my jest from above that an almost fake WC as container of externally supplied CSS might offer a direction. Even if this direction was to develop the WC yourself, Mr. Developer? |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
Problem
People will often expect certain UI components to be inside lion. If they aren't, the default assumption is probably that it's missing, we forgot, or we haven't gotten to it yet.
Often, it's a conscious decision however. Because we've decided that a certain component is best left to the extension design system to build from scratch, and there's no useful base-layer or white-label abstraction for us to put in lion for it. An example could be a grid layout component, or a table. It's hard for us to abstract such a component to a base layer.
To put it in analogies, we create the basis of a delicious dish, but you need to put your own sauce on top of it. But for some dishes, the sauce is the entire dish. Or it's just a soup. There's no meaningful base recipee for us to supply.
Proposal
A clear list in our main README.md of components that we consciously decided not to include in lion, with a short rationale on why (e.g. because there is no meaningful abstraction that isn't sufficiently white labelled), and optionally a list of resources to go to for inspiration on creating these components from scratch.
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
All reactions