"... your markup has no semantics. you can't just look at it and know what things are, by their names."
Huh? I think you've got it exactly backwards. My React components all have semantic names. In contrast, you're apparently using raw HTML "div" elements and relying solely on your style classes' names for semantics. You can certainly do that (with or without functional css) but it's orthogonal to the things that make Tailwind and functional css great, and your complaint makes me wonder about your setup; it's almost as if you're hand-writing and maintaining static HTML identical to what you see with "view source". Are we both talking about styling web applications?
> but it's orthogonal to the things that make Tailwind and functional css great
exactly. that's what i've been saying, and why i don't understand why "inline css" and "functional css" have been conflated.
i'm not sure why you're bringing up react -- i'm talking about the general case of writing markup. obviously you sometimes might write it directly by hand, and sometimes it might be generated for you by react components or server-side components or whatever.
Huh? I think you've got it exactly backwards. My React components all have semantic names. In contrast, you're apparently using raw HTML "div" elements and relying solely on your style classes' names for semantics. You can certainly do that (with or without functional css) but it's orthogonal to the things that make Tailwind and functional css great, and your complaint makes me wonder about your setup; it's almost as if you're hand-writing and maintaining static HTML identical to what you see with "view source". Are we both talking about styling web applications?