| • Introduction to Shoelace library and its evolution into Web Awesome | |
| • Cory LaViska's background and experience in software development | |
| • New Hampshire as a unique place with no state sales tax and optional car insurance | |
| • The book "A libertarian walks into a bear" about a Reddit group taking over a city in New Hampshire | |
| • Discussion of web standards and their importance in modern web development | |
| • Shoelace's focus on low-level web primitives and utility aspect | |
| • Web Components as a baseline for creating reusable components across different frameworks | |
| • The inspiration behind creating Shoelace and its evolution into Web Awesome | |
| • Comparison to Bootstrap and the goal of creating a more versatile and adaptable library | |
| • The origin of Shoelace, a library for building custom web components, is rooted in the limitations of Bootstrap and other pre-built component libraries. | |
| • Cory LaViska built Shoelace as a way to create a custom library of components that could be loaded from a CDN and customized with ease. | |
| • Web Components technology was still relatively new at the time, but it allowed for the creation of custom HTML elements that could work seamlessly across different browsers. | |
| • The success of Shoelace led to the development of a large collection of web components and a growing community of users. | |
| • Despite their widespread adoption (657 million monthly hits on JS Deliver), Web Components are still misunderstood in some parts of the tech community. | |
| • The benefits of Web Components, such as building custom design systems that can be used across different frameworks and platforms, are not yet fully appreciated by many developers. | |
| • Web Components and custom elements are still misunderstood by some developers | |
| • Resistance to using Web Components comes from those who haven't used them before and misconceptions about their complexity | |
| • Stencil is a framework for building Web Component-based design systems | |
| • Shoelace uses Lit, a lightweight library for writing Web Components | |
| • Web Awesome (formerly Shoelace) has a new team and is rebranding with a focus on building a comprehensive design system | |
| • The Kickstarter campaign raised over $720,000 in early backer pledges | |
| • The acquisition/rebranding process of Font Awesome to Web Awesome | |
| • The reasons behind the change and the benefits it brings to the company culture and team | |
| • Clarification on the structure of the rebranded company, including separate products for existing customers | |
| • The business model and revenue streams for Web Awesome, including free offerings and premium components | |
| • The features and benefits of the Premium Package for Web Awesome | |
| • Transition from Shoelace to Web Awesome | |
| • Changes to API and compatibility with existing users | |
| • Theming and extensibility in Web Awesome | |
| • Migration from bespoke form submission library to form-associated custom elements | |
| • Plans for assisting users with migration from Shoelace to Web Awesome | |
| • Discussion on build steps, complexity cost, and the trend of compressing development processes | |
| • Offering both CDN and NPN installation options for flexibility | |
| • Providing flexibility in tooling options, such as CDN or bundler use | |
| • Accommodating users who may not have advanced JavaScript development expertise | |
| • Reducing complexity in web development through abstraction and native language features (e.g. CSS nesting) | |
| • The importance of accessibility and inclusivity in web development | |
| • Transition from using frameworks like Sass to modern platform capabilities (e.g. Web Components, custom elements) | |
| • Current limitations in React support for Web Components, but future plans to phase out React-specific wrappers | |
| • Shoelace module translation to Web Awesome | |
| • Compatibility with different frameworks (Angular, React, Vue) | |
| • Synthetic events layer in React | |
| • Using Lit to React wrapper for compatibility | |
| • Stencil vs Lit vs Mitosis comparison | |
| • Alternate implementations of web component problem space (Qwik, Atomico, TanStack) | |
| • Web Awesome design system works across both free and paid versions | |
| • Cory LaViska discusses the value of Web Awesome in providing pre-built components for web development | |
| • Free version available with limitations, while paid version offers additional features | |
| • Team's goal is to provide accessible, efficient, and well-performing tools for users | |
| • Discussion about potentially removing the "free" label and focusing on branding and differentiation between free and paid versions | |
| • Cory LaViska mentions building small components that users can assemble into larger projects | |
| • Discussion on Web Awesome and its components | |
| • Value proposition of Web Awesome compared to hiring designers and developers | |
| • Underpricing concern and hope for other people to see the value | |
| • Closing thoughts from Jessica Sachs and Amal Hussein | |
| • Personal anecdotes about driving habits in different regions | |
| • Conversation about Austin's unique driving culture |