Possibly redundant functionality

[butzist]

A few days ago I wrote and released a crate featuring a yew component wrapper that uses your library. Now I noticed you also just recently extended the wasm support and added examples for yew.

I wonder if it would make sense integrating this crate into your repo, or if we could move both repos to a joint github org?

[mfreeborn]

My feelings with regards to Wasm support is to provide the framework-agnostic basic building blocks so that other libraries can be build on top of it.

The problem with integrating e.g. Yew directly into the plotly.rs library is that you then have to wonder, should we include a wrapper for sycamore and seed components? What about as-yet-unwritten frontend frameworks? What if the community moves away from Yew - should we still support a Yew component wrapper?

So I would leave the level of Wasm support as it is at the moment i.e. just provides some convenient bindings to plotly.js and I'd leave it to the user to handle how they integrate that with their frontend of choice.

In terms of examples, I'd definitely like more examples of usage within other frontend frameworks. The only reason that the only example is for Yew is because that is the framework I am familiar with personally.

I think there is space in the ecosystem for separate libraries such as yours which specialise for different frontends.

[butzist]

Makes sense to me. Then the maintenance of the yew-specific support/examples could be moved to my crate and I set up some CI tests on my side to assure future compatibility.
How do you suggest to structure the docs? I could create a PR integrating usage examples of the yew-plotly crate in your readme/book.