So far, most of us have been writing Svelte components into .html files, with a few exceptions (Parcel users, for example, have additional constraints to work with). We're currently discussing whether this should change.
Once you've read the pros and cons, please vote!
Pros:
- It signals that you can use your existing HTML (and CSS) knowledge
- Valid HTML is valid Svelte
- Syntax highlighting mostly works everywhere OOTB (expressions in
{tags}are treated as text, though)
Cons:
- Svelte components aren't really HTML
- Tools like Parcel can't deal with it
- We don't get full syntax highlighting
- Some tools, like WebStorm, struggle with directives etc
Pros:
- It signals that it's HTML-with-extras
- Symmetry with
.jsand.jsx - It's an invitation to other frameworks to collaborate, rather than continuously reinventing template languages
Cons:
- No syntax highlighting out of the box — imposes tooling requirements on users, could be offputting for new recruits
- It's a land grab
- May be hard to get Linguist to adopt Svelte syntax highlighting for it
Pros:
- Does what it says on the tin. Zero ambiguity
- Linguist support — we should be able to claim
sveltefor fenced code blocks - It's unlikely to cause conflict with other frameworks etc
Cons:
- No syntax highlighting. Like
.htmlx, the first-time experience is poor
The "Please Vote" links to the results page, where you can't actually vote. Remove the trailing
/rplease.