4 ms·

Betteridge's law of headlines says no, and I really don't see how it would even happen. QML is a great answer to "a web UI standard" but the web is built on ba

Betteridge's law of headlines says no, and I really don't see how it would even happen. QML is a great answer to "a web UI standard" but the web is built on backwards compatibility. Of that restriction were born fantastic technologies and toolkits, such as React, which make the need for an answer kind of moot. I think this is a case of: "if it were going to happen, it would have happened already". QML has existed for a long time (8 years is like five decades in web years) and it hasn't happened. Same reason I kind of roll my eyes whenever people mention client-side certificates when good CSA solutions are brought up... if it were gonna happen, it would have. What is this being downvoted for now?

EGreg 9y ago
+1 for mentioning B's law :)
- jasonkostempski 9y ago
  Dumb law. As an example from a current HN front page headline: "How far can you go with MySQL or MariaDB?" No. At the very least the "law" needs to be rephrased in a less catchy way, but then no one would reference it.
  - virgil_disgr4ce 9y ago
    It's not a 'law,' it's a humorous adage—relax! It's understood to only apply to yes or no questions in the first place.
    - jasonkostempski 9y ago
      This is a discussion about front-end web development, humor cannot exist in such a sad place.
      - deleted 9y ago
        [deleted]
  - yellowapple 9y ago
    "'How far can you go with MySQL or MariaDB?' "No." I mean, that's not entirely wrong. You'd go much farther with PostgreSQL. ;)
    - floatboth 9y ago
      With MySQL, you can go really far into writing corrupted data :)
  - marcosdumay 9y ago
    > "How far can you go with MySQL or MariaDB?" > No. Seems to me like a clear, coherent and realist answer.
efsavage 9y ago
"the web is built on backwards compatibility" It was, at one point, but now that all of the browsers autoupdate and mobile device lifespan is about 2 years, it's rare for anyone to test on anything very old. Try submitting a bug to a site that things don't work on IE5 or NN6.
- scrollaway 9y ago
  Wrong way around. You can browse essentially every single site from 1995 and see exactly what you would have seen at the time.
  - kuschku 9y ago
    Also wrong, most browsers stopped supporting <blink> and <marquee> years ago (as well as many other outdated features, or plugins such as Java or Flash)
    - scrollaway 9y ago
      Yes, and the <bgsound> tag as well. What's your point? We're talking about a tiny part of the spec, vs. introducing something like QML to the ecosystem.
    - api_or_ipa 9y ago
      I want to say those are bad examples but nonetheless valid. A better expample would be Javascript's strict-mode situation. In less civilized times, you could do all sorts of terrible shenanigans with javascript, and luckily for developers strict-mode gained support to the point where everyone naturally assumed you were talking about a strict environment. When ES6 came around, those 'sloppy' mode differences made implementing new features tough, so with adopting ES6, 'sloppy mode' was implicitly dropped. So yes, the web isn't by any means backwards compatible-- but definitely better at it than most ecosystems.
drinchev 9y ago
I like the second part of your comment better. > if it were going to happen, it would have happened already Backward compatibility allows another technology to be used side by side with existing one ( WebAssembly ? ).
prewett 9y ago
You don't replace HTML, you add a new document type that the browser understands: application/qml, or some such. Just like you didn't replace HTML with JPEG, or JPEG with PNG... In fact, the code is already pretty much written for you by Qt.
- scrollaway 9y ago
  Think about the magnitude of what you're saying. Look at how well dart and webp are faring despite a giant behind them... QML in the browser doesn't fill an actual need, and because it's unknown to most web devs even if perfect support magically appeared in all browsers tomorrow, it would not actually be used right out of the gate.

EGreg 9y ago

+1 for mentioning B's law :)

jasonkostempski 9y ago
Dumb law. As an example from a current HN front page headline: "How far can you go with MySQL or MariaDB?" No. At the very least the "law" needs to be rephrased in a less catchy way, but then no one would reference it.
- virgil_disgr4ce 9y ago
  It's not a 'law,' it's a humorous adage—relax! It's understood to only apply to yes or no questions in the first place.
  - jasonkostempski 9y ago
    This is a discussion about front-end web development, humor cannot exist in such a sad place.
    - deleted 9y ago
      [deleted]
- yellowapple 9y ago
  "'How far can you go with MySQL or MariaDB?' "No." I mean, that's not entirely wrong. You'd go much farther with PostgreSQL. ;)
  - floatboth 9y ago
    With MySQL, you can go really far into writing corrupted data :)
- marcosdumay 9y ago
  > "How far can you go with MySQL or MariaDB?" > No. Seems to me like a clear, coherent and realist answer.

efsavage 9y ago

"the web is built on backwards compatibility" It was, at one point, but now that all of the browsers autoupdate and mobile device lifespan is about 2 years, it's rare for anyone to test on anything very old. Try submitting a bug to a site that things don't work on IE5 or NN6.

scrollaway 9y ago
Wrong way around. You can browse essentially every single site from 1995 and see exactly what you would have seen at the time.
- kuschku 9y ago
  Also wrong, most browsers stopped supporting <blink> and <marquee> years ago (as well as many other outdated features, or plugins such as Java or Flash)
  - scrollaway 9y ago
    Yes, and the <bgsound> tag as well. What's your point? We're talking about a tiny part of the spec, vs. introducing something like QML to the ecosystem.
  - api_or_ipa 9y ago
    I want to say those are bad examples but nonetheless valid. A better expample would be Javascript's strict-mode situation. In less civilized times, you could do all sorts of terrible shenanigans with javascript, and luckily for developers strict-mode gained support to the point where everyone naturally assumed you were talking about a strict environment. When ES6 came around, those 'sloppy' mode differences made implementing new features tough, so with adopting ES6, 'sloppy mode' was implicitly dropped. So yes, the web isn't by any means backwards compatible-- but definitely better at it than most ecosystems.

drinchev 9y ago

I like the second part of your comment better. > if it were going to happen, it would have happened already Backward compatibility allows another technology to be used side by side with existing one ( WebAssembly ? ).

prewett 9y ago

You don't replace HTML, you add a new document type that the browser understands: application/qml, or some such. Just like you didn't replace HTML with JPEG, or JPEG with PNG... In fact, the code is already pretty much written for you by Qt.

scrollaway 9y ago
Think about the magnitude of what you're saying. Look at how well dart and webp are faring despite a giant behind them... QML in the browser doesn't fill an actual need, and because it's unknown to most web devs even if perfect support magically appeared in all browsers tomorrow, it would not actually be used right out of the gate.