material-components-web

I'm impressed that, in the meanwhile, Google has already thrown into the grave not one, but two different implementations of Material Design in the web: Material Design Lite [0] and Material Components for the Web [1], bot of which never managed to actually be competitive UI libraries. edit: Actually, they've thrown a total of _three_ implementations into the grave, as MWC is in maintenance mode already [2]. [0]: https://github.com/google/material-design-lite [1]: https://github.com/material-components/material-components-w... [2]: https://github.com/material-components/material-web/discussi...

https://github.com/firebase/firebase-ios-sdk/issues/6115 https://github.com/material-components/material-components-w... Two examples that come to mind but there are plenty

One of my worst decisions as a developer was to build upon a component framework maintained by Google. Material Components for the web is constantly introducing breaking changes that make building upon the framework a nightmare. Lately they've even set this expectation in the project description. The problem is that the components are rather buggy, so you must regularly update them to have upstream bugs fixed. > Material Components Web tends to release breaking changes on a monthly basis, but follows semver so you can control when you incorporate them. We typically follow a 2-week release schedule which includes one major release per month with breaking changes, and intermediate patch releases with bug fixes. https://github.com/material-components/material-components-w... The development team's decisions have been questionable [1][2][3],

I love that people make and share things, and I hate to pour water on announcements. I admire the effort that went into this. That said, it makes me sad to see more fragmentation in the Material space. When Material launched, it was a set of design guidelines. A bunch of open source teams (like Material UI) stepped up and put together libraries that implemented those guidelines for specific view frameworks. This project looks like one of those efforts. Since then, the Material Components for the Web project has formed. It's staffed by Google engineers who collaborate with the designers who write the Material Guidelines. They faithfully implement the Guidelines and makes updates as necessary to keep pace with design changes. The project is designed to be wrapped by other libraries to work with specific view frameworks. I'd hope that

People could just import the individual Material web components, rather than trust any number of 3rd parties to keep their own remake of Material design up to date. https://github.com/material-components/material-components-w...

google material components https://github.com/material-components/material-components-w...

So this is an example of how to use Bootstrap Material Design in different web frameworks? Why use Bootstrap Material Design instead of the Google supported Material Component library that works in any framework and without the added noise of class="foo"? https://github.com/material-components/material-components-w...

> Powered by Material Design Lite That's a curious choice. MDL isn't being developed further and is being replaced by "Material Components for the web" https://github.com/material-components/material-components-w... From https://github.com/google/material-design-lite: Limited support Material Design Lite is now in limited support, with development having moved to the Material Components for the web repository. No further development is taking place in MDL by the core team, but we are happy to review PRs, fix critical bugs and push out new releases. No breaking changes will be accepted.

1) I'm still new to this, but why would someone not use Angular Universal/why is it not default? I have only read positives, but am sure there must be a reason. 2) Why do we need Angular Material 2, when Google's official Material Components Web project is meant to be used with all kinds of frameworks and even has framework integration examples with Angular2: https://github.com/material-components/material-components-w... 3) Should I follow Quickstart or CLI Quickstart in the docs to get started? I have heard that the CLI is recommended nowadays, but the Angular 4.0 release blog says the CLI isn't even stable.

I used Angular Material to build a website. I dunno if you've ever been to the Angular Material website *https://material.angularjs.org/latest/), but check it out if you haven't. You see that nifty looking navigation bar on the left? You can't actually build that using Angular Material given all those wonderful components they list there. There are entire blog posts created so you can make a similar looking navigation menu [1][2]. There are so many things missing or incomplete in this framework that you'll only realize when you try and build a "real" application with it. Guess what? Angular Material is dead. All the developers decided to start over with Angular Material 2 because there's a new screwdriver brand in town: Angular 2. Yay for the people who just want functional doors. [1] http://blog.vizuri.com/creating-your-own-angular-m

The demo is mostly here: https://getmdl.io/ A complete new implementation has been underway since roughly the beginning of this year. They called it v2.0 of mdl and has been under heavy development. Some of their designs is pretty nice: https://github.com/material-components/material-components-w... With the linked announcement they just renamed the mdl project to "material-components-web", nothing more: https://github.com/google/material-design-lite/issues/4984 https://github.com/material-components/material-components-w... I just cloned their new repo and started the compiled demos. I see no difference in behavior/design of the new components compared to the old mdl but the architecture is much more modular and can easily be used in any JS framework.

MD often involves a fair bit of animation. If you look at the individual components, though [1], most of them (like cards) actually have no associated JS at all. Most of the other components, like the TextField (which includes JS to have things like the placeholder text swoop to a mini version above the field once you start typing) have gracefully-degrading versions. Not all of them do, however. 1. https://github.com/material-components/material-components-w...

I'm excited about this development. I'm really looking forward to a web implementation of Material Design that is not bound to Angular 1 and is production ready. I did a few projects using React + Material Design that was enabled by Material-UI component set. [0] And although Material-UI seems like a really great implementation for React, it's certainly not production ready yet. I did spend a significant amount of time fixing / messing with its code to make things work relatively smoothly. Regarding the Google's MDC-Web [1] the demos look promising, although the components seem to lack polish and animations sometimes get stuck. I hope they will push them to the point where these components will be as good as Angular Material ones. [2] [0] - http://www.material-ui.com [1] - https://github.com/material-components/material-components-w... [2