Exercise 1: Bootstrap's Pre-Built Model vs. Tailwind's Utility-First Model — Possible Solution
====================================================================

BOOTSTRAP'S OWN MODEL
------------------------------
Per this chapter, "Bootstrap ships complete, pre-styled, pre-built
components — a real button (.btn .btn-primary), a real navbar, a real
modal, a real grid system — all ready to drop into markup and use
immediately, with a finished, coherent visual design already applied."
Using Bootstrap means applying a small number of Bootstrap's OWN
predefined component class names, each of which brings an ENTIRE,
already-finished visual design along with it — a developer doesn't
design the button's own appearance at all; Bootstrap's own team
already made every visual decision (color, padding, border-radius,
hover state) as part of the .btn-primary class itself.

TAILWIND'S OWN MODEL, PER cssfw1-2
------------------------------
Per cssfw1-2, utility-first means "applying many small, single-purpose
classes directly to an element, each doing exactly one thing." Using
Tailwind means combining many small, individually meaningless utility
classes (p-4, bg-blue-500, rounded-lg) together to CONSTRUCT a
finished visual design piece by piece — no single class carries a
complete, finished design; the developer assembles the final result
themselves out of small building blocks.

THE STRUCTURAL DIFFERENCE
------------------------------
The two models draw the line between "framework-provided" and
"developer-provided" in opposite places. Bootstrap provides the
FINISHED RESULT (a complete, already-designed button) and asks the
developer only to select and apply it. Tailwind provides only the
INDIVIDUAL INGREDIENTS (single-property utility classes) and requires
the developer to actually assemble those ingredients into a finished
design themselves. This is precisely why Bootstrap offers real speed
(per this chapter's own "Real Speed Advantage" section) at the cost of
visual sameness across projects using its defaults, while Tailwind
offers real design flexibility at the cost of more assembly work per
component (per cssfw1-2's own "markup full of classes" material).

WHY THIS WORKS AS AN ANSWER
------------------------------
It defines both models precisely using each chapter's own wording, and
explicitly identifies WHERE the structural line between "framework-
provided" and "developer-provided" falls differently in each paradigm,
rather than simply restating that the two are "different."