Exercise 1: Evaluating an Early-Stage Startup's Marketing Site — Possible Solution
====================================================================

THE SCENARIO
------------------------------
An early-stage startup's marketing site has a small team, no dedicated
designer, and needs to launch quickly.

FACTOR 1: TEAM CSS/DESIGN EXPERTISE
------------------------------
Per this chapter, "a team without dedicated design resources or deep
CSS comfort benefits more from Bootstrap's own finished, professionally-
designed components." The scenario explicitly states there's no
dedicated designer and a small team — exactly the situation this
chapter's own first factor identifies as favoring Bootstrap over
utility-first or headless-plus-custom-styling approaches, both of
which assume real design decision-making capacity the team doesn't
have.

FACTOR 2: DESIGN-SYSTEM MATURITY
------------------------------
Per this chapter, "an early-stage project with no established design
system often benefits from Bootstrap's own built-in design system...
as a starting point." An early-stage startup, by definition, has no
established brand identity or design system yet — this again points
toward Bootstrap (or possibly Tailwind's own token system as an
alternative starting point, per the chapter's own second option), and
explicitly away from the "mature product with an established brand"
scenario the chapter names as favoring full utility-first flexibility.

FACTOR 3: PERFORMANCE/BUNDLE-SIZE NEEDS
------------------------------
Nothing in the scenario suggests performance/bundle size is a serious,
measured concern here — a marketing site prioritizing a quick launch
is unlikely to have invested in detailed performance budgeting yet.
Per this chapter, this factor mainly rules out classic CSS-in-JS
specifically; it doesn't strongly push the decision toward or away
from Bootstrap either way.

FACTOR 4: ACCESSIBILITY REQUIREMENTS
------------------------------
Nothing in the scenario suggests genuinely serious, non-negotiable
accessibility compliance obligations (no mention of public-sector or
enterprise compliance needs) — this factor doesn't strongly apply
here either, though ordinary accessibility good practice would still
matter regardless of framework choice.

CONCLUSION
------------------------------
Bootstrap (cssfw1-5) is the clearest fit here. Factors 1 and 2 — the
two factors most directly relevant to this scenario — both point
toward it explicitly and strongly, per the chapter's own stated
reasoning, while factors 3 and 4 don't provide a strong reason to
choose differently. The "need to launch quickly" requirement further
reinforces this, since Bootstrap's own real speed advantage
(per cssfw1-5) directly serves that specific need.

WHY THIS WORKS AS AN ANSWER
------------------------------
It applies each of the chapter's own four framework factors
individually to the specific scenario, reasoning from the details
actually given, and reaches a conclusion that follows consistently
from the two factors that most directly apply.