Yes, I have. It was one of the things I looked at as part of my initial research before deciding to work on Joystick. What I don't like about is that it's a non-standards based pattern for implementing interactivity in HTML (the same reason I didn't like React, Vue, Svelte, etc).
All of these frameworks try to wedge stuff in between the core languages of the web (HTML, CSS, and JavaScript) for the sake of speed/being clever, but ultimately lead developers into a proprietary skills trap. It's all 100% unnecessary and will (arguably, has) lead to massive confusion and messes in the industry.
By contrast, Joystick uses plain HTML, plain JavaScript DOM events, and plain CSS to build your UI. It just adds some very thin API abstractions over those features to help you move faster.
Honestly, Joystick doesn't seem at all like React, Vue, or Svelte. You have a lot there in terms of email templates, database connections, and other "full stack" items that far exceed the scope of the others.
React is certainly a LOT more cognitive overhead than plain old HTML/CSS/JS. Vue, yes, to a lesser extent than React. But honestly, Svelte is closer to "just plain CSS and HTML" as I've even seen in a framework that also allows two-way data binding, which let's face it is a RPITA in vanilla JS. Automatic scoping of CSS to a component is also nice when you aren't trying to set a global style.
This by the way is coming from a guy who started writing for the web in 1996, back when document.write() was de rigueur. That said, I honestly do miss the old days of figuring out how to make something on a web page by simply hitting "View Source" and picking out the relevant tags.
> Honestly, Joystick doesn't seem at all like React, Vue, or Svelte.
The component framework (@joystick.js/ui) portion is best compared to those.
> Svelte is closer to "just plain CSS and HTML" as I've even seen in a framework that also allows two-way data binding
Joystick does this too but with zero need for a special compiler/extra syntax.
> Automatic scoping of CSS to a component is also nice when you aren't trying to set a global style.
Joystick also does this without any special compiler. Whatever CSS you define on a component is explicitly scoped to the HTML rendered by that component.
---
The compiler and data attribute stuff are the hang up for me. It's adding stuff in that's non-standard. Admittedly, it's neat/clever, but that line of thought has lead (JavaScript-driven) web development down a rabbit hole. I started about 10 years after you (2006) and want to get back to that level of simplicity—sans IE6 rendering bugs—without compromising productivity. I think Joystick hits the sweet spot on that.
All of these frameworks try to wedge stuff in between the core languages of the web (HTML, CSS, and JavaScript) for the sake of speed/being clever, but ultimately lead developers into a proprietary skills trap. It's all 100% unnecessary and will (arguably, has) lead to massive confusion and messes in the industry.
By contrast, Joystick uses plain HTML, plain JavaScript DOM events, and plain CSS to build your UI. It just adds some very thin API abstractions over those features to help you move faster.