What seems more problematic is divergence between drivers. For example, capybara-webkit and poltergeist support several of the same things. Let's take resizing the window as an example. In capybara-webkit this is page.driver.resize_window(x, y) and in poltergeist it's page.driver.resize(x, y). This means that if a user wants to switch from one to the other they have to change their code. Now I don't know if selenium does or doesn't support resizing the window, but supposing it doesn't I think there's still a lot of value in the capybara project deciding what the blessed API is, because then all the drivers that support that feature can implement it using the same API, increasing portability.

However, this would lead to further divergence. Tooling that is built around the assumptions imposed by template literals wouldn't work. It would undermine the meaning of template literals. It would be necessary to define how JSX behaves within the rest of the ECMAScript grammar within the template literal anyway.

divergent connections