0

Is it also acceptable to say

This page built by React / Redux

instead of

This page built with React / Redux

at the bottom of a webpage? Are both acceptable? (React and Redux are both JavaScript frameworks. The official name is React, but sometimes people say React JS to distinguish it from the common word React because people may for a moment not know what you mean by "React" but they know it is a name when you say "React JS"). I think the "is" is omitted usually, like in

This program partly sponsored by Ford Motors

One more catch is, in some framework such as Svelte, it actually compiles your code into something different, and makes it work... in that case, it might be true that "This page built by Svelte", as it actually is built by the programmer and by Svelte compiling / transpiling it?

  • 1
    Leaving out "is", like your last example, is similar to what is done in newspaper headlines. The phrase is there as a notice or disclosure rather than as a complete sentence. "Sponsored by Ford Motors" means Ford actually did the sponsoring. The software package did not actually build the page, it was just a tool. "Built with" or "built using" would be applicable. – fixer1234 Apr 4 '17 at 3:45
2

Depends. I've seen these statements on websites before.

This page built by ReactJS.

as a complete statement is incorrect.

This page was built by ReactJS.

is correct if this implies the ReactJS dev team built the page.

This page was built with ReactJS.

would probably be what you're looking for since it indicates ReactJS (the JS framework) was used to build the page.

  • but at the bottom of ad or posters, I don't see This program is partly sponsored by Ford Motors... I think I see This program partly sponsored by Ford Motors – nonopolarity Apr 4 '17 at 1:25
  • As I said, I've seen it on sites too, but it's still technically incorrect. It's not unheard of for sentences to get a little warped on websites and the like to save screen real estate. – Ash Apr 4 '17 at 1:28
  • in my other comment: technically it is incorrect if it is supposed to be a sentence. But it seems like the intention is not to make it a sentence there but just a phrase – nonopolarity Apr 4 '17 at 15:26
  • Built using ReactJS is also valid and covers both bases to limit ambiguity about who actually developed the site – EyeOfTheHawks Apr 4 '17 at 23:58
  • @Ash please see added note in the question – nonopolarity Feb 4 '20 at 9:30
2

The verb in question is important. Here it is built.

When we say that something is "built by X", X is the builder.

When we say that something is "built with X", X is either a component of the resulting structure or a tool used in the building process.

The house was built by the three little pigs.

The house was built with straw.

The berm was built with a bulldozer.

P.S.

The house was built with care.

The object of with can also refer to the manner of the work. The builders were careful and meticulous when they built the house.

  • the verb is needed to make a complete sentence. The thing is, it seems like the intention was to not make it a complete sentence but just a phrase or something. – nonopolarity Apr 4 '17 at 15:23
  • another example I can think of is, the TV programs on cable TV, sometimes they say, "viewer discretion advised". They don't say "viewer discretion is advised" – nonopolarity Apr 4 '17 at 15:24
  • Your main question was about the prepositions. The phrase is simply a blurb, like a headline on a newspaper, with the verb-to-be ("was") omitted for the sake of brevity. – Tᴚoɯɐuo Apr 4 '17 at 16:16
  • 1
    the three little pigs getting involved here makes the answer induce so much happiness factor – nonopolarity Apr 5 '17 at 13:58
  • please see added note in the question – nonopolarity Feb 4 '20 at 9:31

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.