The vision of Open UI is "interoperability" but it doesn't explain what exactly is supposed to interoperate. To support that vague vision, Open UI identifies f

The vision of Open UI is "interoperability" but it doesn't explain what exactly is supposed to interoperate. To support that vague vision, Open UI identifies four goals, and all of them are silly. 1) Document component names as they exist today 2) A common language for describing UIs and design systems 3) Eventual browser standards for web app components 4) Converging designer processes and developer workflows #1 and #2 seem like two sides of the same coin, but they don't directly solve any "interoperability" problem. Agreeing to use the same name for "button" or "switch" would hardly solve this problem from the vision statement: "Untold amounts of human effort are exhausted globally every day on rebuilding identical components for web apps." #4 is so vague that I literally have no idea what it means. As for #3, we already have have browser standards for web app components. What would Open UI deliver? My best guess is that Open UI is laying the groundwork for built-in standardized web components like std-switch https://github.com/tkent-google/std-switch https://github.com/tkent-google/std-switch and std-toast. https://github.com/jackbsteinberg/std-toast https://github.com/jackbsteinberg/std-toast In that case, I think the vision statement should say: "Open UI will develop new web components that we hope will one day become built-in standard browser features. To do that, we're going to scrutinize popular UI design systems, looking for cowpaths to pave."