This is the core fallacy though, imho: css ITSELF is already the tool for "mapping individual styles" to DOM elements.
Oldschool "CSS Frameworks" are libraries intended to bootstrap UI creation by providing abstractions of those mappings for a set of universally required UI patterns.
Tailwind pioneered the idea of "functional css" as a means to fix the "one-off classes" style bloat for anything that is NOT a specific component pattern (think "this specific archive view should be presented as a 3 column grid")
But when you end up aliasing all of CSS with such utilities, and then writing your styles to markup atts directly ... you aren't using a "framework" anymore, you simply "wrapped" most of CSS itself in a bunch of rainbow tables and littered it all over your markup, resulting in a highly illegible and unstructured style system
krsdcbl|1 year ago
Oldschool "CSS Frameworks" are libraries intended to bootstrap UI creation by providing abstractions of those mappings for a set of universally required UI patterns.
Tailwind pioneered the idea of "functional css" as a means to fix the "one-off classes" style bloat for anything that is NOT a specific component pattern (think "this specific archive view should be presented as a 3 column grid")
But when you end up aliasing all of CSS with such utilities, and then writing your styles to markup atts directly ... you aren't using a "framework" anymore, you simply "wrapped" most of CSS itself in a bunch of rainbow tables and littered it all over your markup, resulting in a highly illegible and unstructured style system