it is a little tricky because it looks like a missing word from a valid English sentence when
React.Component is not a normal English word.
I get what you're saying, but in a coding course where code will be interspersed with such a sentence, what wording would've to you made it clearer? Let me know! **
Not sure about your second question. Need to do some research and get back to you. I'll update here with what I find. Most use
React.Component, although some use just Component. I'd have thought you could use just Component with your
import, but it's not used nor working for me at https://reactjs.org/
update: In the context of the course, as it goes for a simple include, the default babel transpiler didn't (and still doesn't) understand
import. A more complete, standard installation allows for this, but you need a Babel plugin or a builder or Webpack I believe, all, again, provided by using the npm approach to installing. So the import will work in other contexts, not the course's
Regardless, in the course--and I'm not sure why but it seems like a log of actual React code out there that's more production-y--use React.Component.
** In my case, before even looking at this post, and just noticing it was 2.3, I did the challenge. I normally do this to not bias myself. I put in Component, as I obviously forgot the details, but clicked on Watch video, and that jogged my memory to use React.Component. In other words, I had a different issue, so can't quite see what to do to avoid this confusion. Maybe it's "good confusion", both yours and mine. I'm leaning toward that at the moment.