6 ms·

I would have thought ditching HTML, the box model, CSS and JavaScript to be a more important objective that should come sooner than this. Or another way to put

by whyme 13y ago

I would have thought ditching HTML, the box model, CSS and JavaScript to be a more important objective that should come sooner than this. Or another way to put this would be: Wouldn't development efficiency/simplicity be more important than running the current junk in parallel?

steveklabnik 13y ago
"rebuilding the entire world wide web" is one of the few projects that I'd imagine is _more_ difficult than "write a new web browser from scratch."
- whyme 13y ago
  Well the sooner we start the better. ;)
  - angersock 13y ago
    Why? What's the pain point here, beyond just wanting to reinvent a round-enough wheel?
    - whyme 13y ago
      It's not a case of the wheel needing to be round enough. The wheel is old and has not been able to keep pace. We have many people walking aside the wagon repairing the wheel at every turn. Those people are the current browsers. The wagon is the current technology and the people going along for the ride can see just how painful this is. Anyone who has attempted to implement trivial things, like thematic scrollbars or cross-browser capable code, or dealt with dom thrashing via JavaScript, knows the amount of effort going in (or knowledge required) to do trivial things is ridiculous; considering how long we've been travelling down this road. Why are we still using a wagon? And why do we want to build more of them running in parallel?
      - coldtea 13y ago
        >Anyone who has attempted to implement trivial things, like thematic scrollbars or cross-browser capable code, or dealt with dom thrashing via JavaScript, knows the amount of effort going in (or knowledge required) to do trivial things is ridiculous That's true, but that's maybe for the better? In the sense that it leaves a place for desktop and native apps to thrive too. I would worry if the browsers was a great execution environment, that could even run Photoshop or Valve or Pro Tools, and every company went that route. It would mean total loss of data freedom (they would push you to have them in the "cloud"), and a rent-model for software purchases, with software being able to completely change under your feet (like Gmail did for example).
pcwalton 13y ago
A clean break from the past was tried once already: XHTML 2.0. It failed. We absolutely plan to (and are!) working on new standards that enable greater efficiency and developer productivity. I don't like the fact that floats are used for layout any more than anyone does, not the least because it makes it hard to parallelize. But at the end of the day we're building a browser, not a from-scratch app platform.
- whyme 13y ago
  XHTML 2.0 was not a worthy successor. Apologies if my hatred for the current technology is coming through, but hey... At least I'm being honest.
- bct 13y ago
  It failed for a number of reasons - timing, lack of compelling new features, IE's lack of support for application/xhtml+xml, Gecko's Yellow Screen of Death, etc. I'm not sure that you can blame any one of them. And it really wasn't a clean break in the sense that whyme is talking about.
  - pcwalton 13y ago
    I'm pretty sure it failed due to not being backwards compatible. Sometimes you can throw stuff away if it isn't getting much use, but backwards compatibility is too important in the real world. If your browser won't browse the Web, consumers simply won't use it.
- sbierwagen 13y ago
  He didn't mention XHTML. He seems to be talking about an entirely new layout language, which is nutty, but not as crazy as XHTML, which was "let's make everything way more complicated for the sake of ideological purity, but not add any new features"
azakai 13y ago
What's the superior alternative? (serious question)
- adamnemecek 13y ago
  I don't think that he knows. No one does. But that does not mean that it isn't something that should be discussed.
  - azakai 13y ago
    Well, of course, I don't think any reasonable person would say it shouldn't be discussed. I was just hoping there was some interesting project already underway I could read about.
- whyme 13y ago
  At a really high level... Create an entirely different model. One that acts as a hybrid between a full blown inefficient co-ordinate system and, plausibly, a more efficient box model. We could start by modelling 'movement' which equates to objects having 1. A reference point, 2. A magnitude and 3. A direction. It would be beneficial to do this in such a way that one could apply functions to said model achieving a reactive design that gives you a sense of a full blown co-ordinate system while achieving simpler mechanisms for ease in development and efficiency. I know that's pretty high level stuff, but in my mind I can see a fairly clear path to achieve a significant improvement.
  - azakai 13y ago
    Cool, that sounds interesting. I certainly think it's worth experimenting with stuff like that in parallel to projects like Servo which optimize current standards, long-term it's hard to tell which will be better.
  - iSnow 13y ago
    You won't displace entrenched technology with an entirely different model, no matter how good. Sorry, this is just a pipe dream. The real competition for the web are the walled gardens of iOS and Android App development.
scriptproof 13y ago
Something like XAML?
- CmonDev 13y ago
  Man it's so much much better then crap-tml! I can layout anything flexibly and reliably in like 5 minutes.

by whyme 13y ago

steveklabnik 13y ago

"rebuilding the entire world wide web" is one of the few projects that I'd imagine is _more_ difficult than "write a new web browser from scratch."

whyme 13y ago
Well the sooner we start the better. ;)
- angersock 13y ago
  Why? What's the pain point here, beyond just wanting to reinvent a round-enough wheel?
  - whyme 13y ago
    It's not a case of the wheel needing to be round enough. The wheel is old and has not been able to keep pace. We have many people walking aside the wagon repairing the wheel at every turn. Those people are the current browsers. The wagon is the current technology and the people going along for the ride can see just how painful this is. Anyone who has attempted to implement trivial things, like thematic scrollbars or cross-browser capable code, or dealt with dom thrashing via JavaScript, knows the amount of effort going in (or knowledge required) to do trivial things is ridiculous; considering how long we've been travelling down this road. Why are we still using a wagon? And why do we want to build more of them running in parallel?
    - coldtea 13y ago
      >Anyone who has attempted to implement trivial things, like thematic scrollbars or cross-browser capable code, or dealt with dom thrashing via JavaScript, knows the amount of effort going in (or knowledge required) to do trivial things is ridiculous That's true, but that's maybe for the better? In the sense that it leaves a place for desktop and native apps to thrive too. I would worry if the browsers was a great execution environment, that could even run Photoshop or Valve or Pro Tools, and every company went that route. It would mean total loss of data freedom (they would push you to have them in the "cloud"), and a rent-model for software purchases, with software being able to completely change under your feet (like Gmail did for example).

pcwalton 13y ago

A clean break from the past was tried once already: XHTML 2.0. It failed. We absolutely plan to (and are!) working on new standards that enable greater efficiency and developer productivity. I don't like the fact that floats are used for layout any more than anyone does, not the least because it makes it hard to parallelize. But at the end of the day we're building a browser, not a from-scratch app platform.

whyme 13y ago
XHTML 2.0 was not a worthy successor. Apologies if my hatred for the current technology is coming through, but hey... At least I'm being honest.
bct 13y ago
It failed for a number of reasons - timing, lack of compelling new features, IE's lack of support for application/xhtml+xml, Gecko's Yellow Screen of Death, etc. I'm not sure that you can blame any one of them. And it really wasn't a clean break in the sense that whyme is talking about.
- pcwalton 13y ago
  I'm pretty sure it failed due to not being backwards compatible. Sometimes you can throw stuff away if it isn't getting much use, but backwards compatibility is too important in the real world. If your browser won't browse the Web, consumers simply won't use it.
sbierwagen 13y ago
He didn't mention XHTML. He seems to be talking about an entirely new layout language, which is nutty, but not as crazy as XHTML, which was "let's make everything way more complicated for the sake of ideological purity, but not add any new features"

azakai 13y ago

What's the superior alternative? (serious question)

adamnemecek 13y ago
I don't think that he knows. No one does. But that does not mean that it isn't something that should be discussed.
- azakai 13y ago
  Well, of course, I don't think any reasonable person would say it shouldn't be discussed. I was just hoping there was some interesting project already underway I could read about.
whyme 13y ago
At a really high level... Create an entirely different model. One that acts as a hybrid between a full blown inefficient co-ordinate system and, plausibly, a more efficient box model. We could start by modelling 'movement' which equates to objects having 1. A reference point, 2. A magnitude and 3. A direction. It would be beneficial to do this in such a way that one could apply functions to said model achieving a reactive design that gives you a sense of a full blown co-ordinate system while achieving simpler mechanisms for ease in development and efficiency. I know that's pretty high level stuff, but in my mind I can see a fairly clear path to achieve a significant improvement.
- azakai 13y ago
  Cool, that sounds interesting. I certainly think it's worth experimenting with stuff like that in parallel to projects like Servo which optimize current standards, long-term it's hard to tell which will be better.
- iSnow 13y ago
  You won't displace entrenched technology with an entirely different model, no matter how good. Sorry, this is just a pipe dream. The real competition for the web are the walled gardens of iOS and Android App development.

scriptproof 13y ago

Something like XAML?

CmonDev 13y ago
Man it's so much much better then crap-tml! I can layout anything flexibly and reliably in like 5 minutes.