The argument to standardize it isn't really "because React does it", it's "because a ton of developers find it really useful". That seems kind of undeniable to me, even as someone that dislikes a lot of React.
I don't think that it is sound to incorporate a DSL that imitates html only approximately into a language. That should remain an external library at best.
And that's irrespectively of my view on jsx, the latter which I find non ergonomic and confusing.
That many people are being force fed it to the point of familiarity does not mean that it is the best DX.
we went from (html + js> to html in js and js in html. Quite very confusing to me. Knotty (naughty) complexity pun intended.
It's more akin to stockolm syndrom to not improve on the statu quo at this point.
To provide a quick feedback, I believe the 'without jsx' version could have been improved.
One advantage it already has is that it doesn't need the repetition of /closing> elements.
But it doesn't go far enough in terms of function composition to pass arguments. The signature (that resembles react.createElement I guess) is too cumbersome.
That creates a succession of braces and comma which is unfortunate.
Just to specify some object attributes. That could be easily a function Attr().
We have higher order functions easily in javascript. We should make use of it.
That eliminates html looking jsx since we just use functions. That's less confusing than pseudo html syntax.
