Sven Kannengiesser

C

I would add to that:

Let the users decide when they want to open a link in a new window or tab.

Did you know there was a "Polyglot Unconference", too? @speakingfluently.bsky.social #polyglotconference

Ooomph! I've been doing web development ever since the days of Netscape 4.6 and Internet Explorer 5, but never have I known of the existence of this nifty and handy API!

Read that article today and thought “Okay, nice. But…! Why this boilerplate and another layer of abstraction, if you cannot even take full advantage of classes?”

Functional custom elements the easy way Function-based JavaScript is really common in frameworks like React and Vue, but what about Web Components? Ginger is here to show you how to build a reusable function to do just that.

Are you referring to piccalil.li/blog/functio... by any chance?

I'd give github.com/jorgebucaran... a shot. It has reactive templating, it's client side (no build step needed!), its DOM diffing is very efficient, and your data (= state) stays in JS. I've been using it for quite a few years, and it plays very nicely with its neighbors.

So thankful for this tip! I was already mad about this behavior.

Very insightful! Made me rethink my/our strategy (micro-frontend architecture using web components with closed shadow DOM).

In a popover that is used in two places (i.e. triggered by different buttons), but with the same content.

Wow, this is great! Keep it coming... ;-)

Your “Horizontal Scroll” example has a wrong closing tag (</tbody> instead of </div>). The example therefore only works partially.

Oh shoot! :-(

Yes, but I would name the attribute _bound_, not -binded-.

/** Input.js **/

import { FormAssociated, internals } from "./FormAssociated.js";

class Input extends FormAssociated {
get value() {
return this[internals].formValue;
}
set value(newValue) {
this[internals].setFormValue(newValue);
}
}

/** FormAssociated.js **/

const internals = Symbol("internals");

class FormAssociated extends HTMLElement {
constructor() {
super();
this[internals] = this.attachInternals();
}
}

export { FormAssociated, internals };

I use symbols for "protected" fields & methods. Here is an abbreviated use case (see 🧵). The trick is to have a symbol for accessing the field/method, and export it together with the class. The importing module extends from the superclass which uses the symbol for access to the inherited internals.

I give up. I'll leave you to it. If you think this one video shows the correct translations of "to ride" into Spanish and Hebrew, then so be it. I wish you a long and happy life. You won't hear from me again.

And yes, you really are stubborn, aren't you? And cannot admit or accept when you are (or better: the content of the video is) wrong. Reminds me of that Orange Desaster in the White House. Oh my... 🤷‍♂️

I don't doubt that your methods work. I haven't seen the rest of your work (or business). I've only seen that one video. And it shows crap. Sorry, but IMO it is like it is: wrong translations of "to ride".

Again, I am not against YOU or your business, but I am against things that are so obviously outright WRONG.

All I want to express is my "concern" (yes, in that sense, I am a concern troll) that relying on technology without questioning and checking is dangerous. I know what I am talking about. I work for IT myself. For over 30 years now.

I am a polyglot and linguaphile myself. I am not a professional as you are. I have studied both Spanish and Hebrew (and many other languages) for years and to a great extent. And never ever have I come across such Google-wannabe-infinitives.

For the Hebrew verb forms I'd suggest you give www.pealim.com a try. If you search for "לרכב" without the niqudim you do get both לִרְכַּב (lirkav) and "לִרְכֹּב~לרכוב" (lirkov), but you also get "ל־ + רֶכֶב" (la-rechev, a ketel pattern noun) which means "to (the) vehicle". And that's what your video shows.

[Screenshot] What is an infinitive in Spanish? In Spanish the infinitive (infinitivo) consists of one word and not two words as in English (to + verb …. are two words).

The Spanish infinitive consists of only ONE word, unlike English. See for instance www.woodwardspanish.com/lesson/spani...

In no Spanish grammar that I own can I find an example where "a" + stem + "-ar/-er/-ir" is given as the infinitive form. Try to find it yourself.

Now, whether "a" + infinitive is used colloquially in some part of the mundo hispanohablante, I don't know. But I consider it wrong to teach it this way.

You are right. I am not a native speaker of neither Spanish nor Hebrew. But I know the basic rules of grammar of each. And I consider infinitives one of the must-know basics of grammar (if the respective language actually HAS infinitives as a concept). Other parts of grammar are less important.

See? We started on the wrong foot! I am not a troll. But sometimes I call out bs (maybe I shouldn’t have used this harsh word) when I see it. It’s constructive criticism I am trying to give. Sorry if I offended you.

I am not against you or your building a business around it. On the contrary, I do encourage you to do it! But do it with the correct input/output, man! I’m sure you can do that!

Google Translate is a translating tool, that needs context to work best! It is NOT a dictionary that looks up words (here: infinitives) for you.

The video uses/shows "a montar" which is clearly a noun with a preposition. Without the "a" it becomes an infinitive. And "לָרֶכֶב" is also a noun with a preposition meaning "to/for the ride". Google Translate is bad in this case, because it lacks the context to properly translate your input.