4 ms·

What are some of the design choices you would make differently than existing browsers?

emsy 7y ago
Ditch CSS and HTML completely and create a sensible layout engine. If you base everything on a low level rendering API, you can basically create your own framework (though you shouldn't need to). Databinding, event handling etc. should be as simple as in Desktop apps, so we don't need to create ham-fisted abstractions á la Angular or React. Make it so that 90% of the websites don't need any additional code (so that you can reasonably ask users for code execution permissions, similar to notifications). Maybe add the option for low level networking so you don't need to create interfaces so you can support mail protocols natively (I'm unsure about this). Make accessibility so simple it becomes the default. Performance should be a no brainer too. Make tracking as hard as possible from the get-go. Keep the specification lean and don't add stuff on corporate whims. Reduce the memory usage of browsers. Since it's based on WASM you can use any language you want. Hopefully this will encourage better programming practices. Because frankly, the current JavaScript framework/NPM/Yarn/Gulp/Bower/whatever environment is just ridiculous. Most technical issues can realistically be tackled. I doubt you could win against Google et al. on the tracking/code execution stuff.
- ScottFree 7y ago
  > Databinding, event handling etc. should be as simple as in Desktop apps I'm pretty ignorant of how desktop apps work; how simple is it? Are we talking a straight up pub/sub system?
  - emsy 7y ago
    Sorry, just saw this. The problem with angular and react databinding is that it takes away control from developers. A simple pub/sub system can be extended to everything a developer wants, without clumsy hash-key insertion, digest cycles or array reconciliation. I think WPF did it fairly well back in the day.

emsy 7y ago

Ditch CSS and HTML completely and create a sensible layout engine. If you base everything on a low level rendering API, you can basically create your own framework (though you shouldn't need to). Databinding, event handling etc. should be as simple as in Desktop apps, so we don't need to create ham-fisted abstractions á la Angular or React. Make it so that 90% of the websites don't need any additional code (so that you can reasonably ask users for code execution permissions, similar to notifications). Maybe add the option for low level networking so you don't need to create interfaces so you can support mail protocols natively (I'm unsure about this). Make accessibility so simple it becomes the default. Performance should be a no brainer too. Make tracking as hard as possible from the get-go. Keep the specification lean and don't add stuff on corporate whims. Reduce the memory usage of browsers. Since it's based on WASM you can use any language you want. Hopefully this will encourage better programming practices. Because frankly, the current JavaScript framework/NPM/Yarn/Gulp/Bower/whatever environment is just ridiculous. Most technical issues can realistically be tackled. I doubt you could win against Google et al. on the tracking/code execution stuff.

ScottFree 7y ago
> Databinding, event handling etc. should be as simple as in Desktop apps I'm pretty ignorant of how desktop apps work; how simple is it? Are we talking a straight up pub/sub system?
- emsy 7y ago
  Sorry, just saw this. The problem with angular and react databinding is that it takes away control from developers. A simple pub/sub system can be extended to everything a developer wants, without clumsy hash-key insertion, digest cycles or array reconciliation. I think WPF did it fairly well back in the day.