4 ms·

Sandboxed apps are not really a good thing IMO. I agree that webassembly is a good thing too. BUT, my critic is about the DOM and the text-only approach, and a

by jokoon 10y ago

Sandboxed apps are not really a good thing IMO. I agree that webassembly is a good thing too. BUT, my critic is about the DOM and the text-only approach, and also HTML not being strict enough so that all browsers can use it. It is the same compromise between having a compiled or an interpreted language. A compiled language will always be faster and smaller. If you put the burden on a HTML compiler instead of how the browser displays a binary document, you won't have those issues.

wvenable 10y ago
> Sandboxed apps are not really a good thing IMO. Interesting because isn't that sort of what you advocating for. Ultimately what's the difference between strict compiled binary executable "HTML" and something like a Java applet? > BUT, my critic is about the DOM and the text-only approach, and also HTML not being strict enough so that all browsers can use it. But really the problem isn't the syntax of HTML/CSS/JS but the semantics. Everybody can parse this stuff pretty much equivalently now but they still do different things with it. I don't see how compiling to binary would change that.
- jokoon 10y ago
  Binary html is not an executable nor a program, it is just data, here it would be the dom tree, compiled, not using text data all over. > I don't see how compiling to binary would change that. The solution is forcing a stricter version of the language. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q4dYwEyjZcY https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q4dYwEyjZcY
  - wvenable 10y ago
    Two issues: the problem is semantics not syntax. A binary version of HTML with all the same values a text version of HTML won't change anything. It isn't the values, it's what done with the values. This is a fix to a problem that doesn't exist. A stricter version of HTML would not have allowed for the progressive enhancement that existed throughout the evolution of HTML.

by jokoon 10y ago

wvenable 10y ago

> Sandboxed apps are not really a good thing IMO. Interesting because isn't that sort of what you advocating for. Ultimately what's the difference between strict compiled binary executable "HTML" and something like a Java applet? > BUT, my critic is about the DOM and the text-only approach, and also HTML not being strict enough so that all browsers can use it. But really the problem isn't the syntax of HTML/CSS/JS but the semantics. Everybody can parse this stuff pretty much equivalently now but they still do different things with it. I don't see how compiling to binary would change that.

jokoon 10y ago
Binary html is not an executable nor a program, it is just data, here it would be the dom tree, compiled, not using text data all over. > I don't see how compiling to binary would change that. The solution is forcing a stricter version of the language. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q4dYwEyjZcY https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q4dYwEyjZcY
- wvenable 10y ago
  Two issues: the problem is semantics not syntax. A binary version of HTML with all the same values a text version of HTML won't change anything. It isn't the values, it's what done with the values. This is a fix to a problem that doesn't exist. A stricter version of HTML would not have allowed for the progressive enhancement that existed throughout the evolution of HTML.