Although Storybook has been useful in guiding the initial development of the library, it would be more realistic if the library is consumed directly in a plain webpack application.
Particularly for Svelte, Storybook does not illustrate usage of components in a deliberate way. The consumption of components is currently hidden in .Story.svelte files.
Pain points of Storybook/Svelte
Clicking a knob reloads the entire Story (does not preserve two-way binding)
Expensive set-up (multiple addons... etc) and large build size
Not as "real world" as a barebones webpack set-up
Addon source plugin does not reveal the source code of invoking Svelte components
Benefits of using a plain webpack set-up
More configuration control
More "real world" because it IS an application
Better optimized final build output
Illustrate two-way binding (one of the features of Svelte)
Provide real code snippet of usage per component
Features
Quick/Slow Start guides on initial set-up
Documentation on why carbon-components, carbon-icons-svelte are peer deps
Although Storybook has been useful in guiding the initial development of the library, it would be more realistic if the library is consumed directly in a plain webpack application.
Particularly for Svelte, Storybook does not illustrate usage of components in a deliberate way. The consumption of components is currently hidden in
.Story.svelte
files.Pain points of Storybook/Svelte
Addon source
plugin does not reveal the source code of invoking Svelte componentsBenefits of using a plain webpack set-up
Features
carbon-components
,carbon-icons-svelte
are peer depsPlan