The things that deters me about Brick are that there aren't very many components yet, they aren't very styled or pretty, and the site doesn't show me what the components look like on one page (I have to click through to a demo for each component). It's only been around for a year, though honestly with the support it has gotten, I'd need to see more before I'm able to imagine developers using it. Obviously, it's a beautiful concept.<p>I like Ionic's, which is the most fully fleshed out set of UI components I've seen. Though it's not as modular as Brick, I'd rather have a complete monolithic set of components rather than sparse modular ones: <a href="http://ionicframework.com/docs/components/" rel="nofollow">http://ionicframework.com/docs/components/</a><p>The site does throw some errors, which leads me to believe this wasn't meant to be shared yet. Although, Brick has done the "HN launch" already in the past.
I clicked through all of the examples, and I would never use any of these components. They are very plain, they don't provide much functionality, and the functionality they provide is lackluster ( unappealing ).<p>As others here have stated, I also couldn't tell if some of the examples are even working or not; they are that bad.<p>If you are looking for a fine set of interworking components that provide a refined look and feel along with nice examples of the options provided; then you'll probably want to look at one of the other 30 or so UI widget sets.
wth is going on at mozilla? There seems to be a lot of excitement to create stuff, without much attention to whether it's needed .. or where the lifecycle goes beyond creation.<p><a href="http://www.ianbicking.org/blog/2014/09/professional-transitions.html" rel="nofollow">http://www.ianbicking.org/blog/2014/09/professional-transiti...</a>
The demos seems very unpolished but I hope they keep working on it.<p>Does anyone know what framework is used to 'generate' such doc websites? <a href="http://brick.mozilla.io/v2.0/docs" rel="nofollow">http://brick.mozilla.io/v2.0/docs</a>
I looked at this in Chrome and honestly couldn't figure out if the examples were actually working.<p>Also, Stylus seems a curious choice (not because it's bad, just that it's not exactly the frontrunner in the CSS preprocessor race). I'm not even sure why a CSS preprocessor is even necessary, to be honest.
There are some invalid links on the page:<p>- 'Fork me on Github' points to <a href="https://github.com/gkoberger/test" rel="nofollow">https://github.com/gkoberger/test</a> instead of <a href="https://github.com/mozbrick/brick" rel="nofollow">https://github.com/mozbrick/brick</a><p>- The Github link at the 'Keep Up To Date' section points to <a href="http://twitter.com/mozbrick" rel="nofollow">http://twitter.com/mozbrick</a><p>Update: Nice to see that the links are fixed.
For me personally, the challenge UI frameworks like Bootstrap solve is the <i>pure UI</i>. That is, which borders, shadows and spacings to use and such stuff. A thin layer on top of the actual APIs like Mozilla Brick does not seem too useful to me - why bother adding a third party component if it merely wraps the functionality of HTML/CSS? (Although I must admit I haven't used Brick yet.)
Hm... am I correct that the brick-action component is actually their way of setting up a listener, like Backbone's obj.listenTo(anotherObj, 'event', callback)?
Well, in that case it's one hell of an overhead, imagine creating an actual DOM element for every single event listener.
Firefox still does not seem to support fully web components (html templates, custom elements, shadowdom see <a href="http://caniuse.com/#search=shadowdom" rel="nofollow">http://caniuse.com/#search=shadowdom</a> )<p>I hope they will get there fast - this will put pressure on dinosaurs like IE or Safari
The first two demos aren't styled, and don't work in Safari 8, and the third one says "coming soon." C'mon, guys...I understand I'm in the minority for using Safari, but you really need to think about the demo'ability of what you build.
I don't see a reference to Mozilla's X-Tags. X-Tags already links to listings of web components so why is this so different than that listing but also similar?
Designmodo has their own UI framework, The Bricks:<p><a href="http://designmodo.com/the-bricks/" rel="nofollow">http://designmodo.com/the-bricks/</a><p>Seems a bit close for comfort
Can I use this client-side? From what I read on the page this seems to be only geared towards a certain server-side-setup with node.js, brewer and stuff.
I tried to look at the "tab bar" on my iPad, it just looked like a regular unstyled document, didn't seem to respond to any taps. Guess I just don't get it!
I wonder when we'll have projects like this targeting all browsers, and specialized functionalities for projects like Node-Webkit, maybe a fork of Bootstrap tailored towards total customization of Node-Webkit, or even a PureCSS fork as well. After using applications like Atraci, SickBeard, and others I've really come to enjoy desktop applications with web based UI's more.<p>On another note, as someone else mentioned, there's too many package managers, a package manager that detects when you try to use a package manager you don't have installed, and installs it for you would be a neat project to have, although talk about dependency hell.
Can we get a package manager for package managers?<p>There is so many already, its hard to keep track what names come from what repositories of what package managers.<p>It used to be so simple, yourDistroPackageManager install whatever, now there is x2000 versions of packageManager.