Not going to go through point by point, because this isn't a great format for longer form discussion.
In general, the points you're raising apply to edge case use of WC.
Most of your gripes are around shadow dom, and I understand that and agree with you - CSS parts and all that stuff are pretty bad. However - I don't use shadow dom. It was intended to be low level API for when you need to author with complete encapsulation.
I've been doing native WC for years and I've never run into a situation where I need shadow dom. Or slots. Or any of that stuff.
The "attributes" vs "props" thing is a html/dom issue, not a WC issue, and again - just about any rendering library will deal with it for you, the same way react or vue or whatever does. It's an utter non-issue in normal development, I write WCs every day and haven't even thought about that in forever.
SSR and lazy loading are anti-features for me. If you really want them with WC the sure, jump into a framework like stencil, but I have zero use for them.
SSR is all about SEO and FCP, and I've never really grokked it's usefulness.
If I need SEO I don't do UI SPA stuff, I just write server side, and I don't need a component framework for that. FCP (first contentful paint) is already a gazillion times faster with WC than any framework I've ever used. The whole point of lazy loading is to defer work until it needs to be done, but you already get that with reactivity - you trigger your component data load on a property setter anyway if it needs to load, and if it's just rendering off properties there's no need for a lazy load.
The TLDR is that you're making this massive straw man argument about bad API with WC, but it's for this tiny edge case of use that's only intended for library authors and such.
The 99% use case will never encounter any of that.
I could build up a big(er) wall of text about the same sort of stuff for all of the frameworks too.
When you want to do complex things - it's complex.
In years of WC work, light weight components using light DOM and a little templating library - I've run into the issues you're talking about exactly zero times.
Also, you may want to double check your understanding of frameworks use and embrace of WCs.
> edge case use ... I've ... for me ... I ... straw man
This is why I hate engaging into any arguments with proponents and apologists of web components.
Any concern and criticism is brushed away as non-existent and insignificant. Even if the actual people who develop this and push this into the browsers are now marking them as not only valid, but a significant problem.
But sure, do keep telling yourslef that theonly reason why more people don't use them is because people don't like the name "connectedCallback"
> you may want to double check your understanding of frameworks use and embrace of WCs.
Please do this yourself. Outside of frameworks and libraries that explicitly advertise themselves as being 100% based on web components (like lit and stencil) almost no one uses them as the foundation. They may consume them, and they may have a way to compile components to them, but almost none actually use them.
And yes, keep telling yourself it's because of "connectedCallback" naming.
In general, the points you're raising apply to edge case use of WC.
Most of your gripes are around shadow dom, and I understand that and agree with you - CSS parts and all that stuff are pretty bad. However - I don't use shadow dom. It was intended to be low level API for when you need to author with complete encapsulation.
I've been doing native WC for years and I've never run into a situation where I need shadow dom. Or slots. Or any of that stuff.
The "attributes" vs "props" thing is a html/dom issue, not a WC issue, and again - just about any rendering library will deal with it for you, the same way react or vue or whatever does. It's an utter non-issue in normal development, I write WCs every day and haven't even thought about that in forever.
SSR and lazy loading are anti-features for me. If you really want them with WC the sure, jump into a framework like stencil, but I have zero use for them.
SSR is all about SEO and FCP, and I've never really grokked it's usefulness.
If I need SEO I don't do UI SPA stuff, I just write server side, and I don't need a component framework for that. FCP (first contentful paint) is already a gazillion times faster with WC than any framework I've ever used. The whole point of lazy loading is to defer work until it needs to be done, but you already get that with reactivity - you trigger your component data load on a property setter anyway if it needs to load, and if it's just rendering off properties there's no need for a lazy load.
The TLDR is that you're making this massive straw man argument about bad API with WC, but it's for this tiny edge case of use that's only intended for library authors and such.
The 99% use case will never encounter any of that.
I could build up a big(er) wall of text about the same sort of stuff for all of the frameworks too.
When you want to do complex things - it's complex.
In years of WC work, light weight components using light DOM and a little templating library - I've run into the issues you're talking about exactly zero times.
Also, you may want to double check your understanding of frameworks use and embrace of WCs.