3 ms·
I think there's not nearly as much agreement on how a "web app" might look or work today as there was for a desktop app even as early as the early '90s. For "c
by djur 12y ago
I think there's not nearly as much agreement on how a "web app" might look or work today as there was for a desktop app even as early as the early '90s.
For "classic" (content-based) web apps (forums, CMSes, blogs), there's already fairly sophisticated, end user-targeted tools that fill that role. For a lot of people, WordPress is the Visual Basic of the web. Some wiki engines could be said to resemble Hypercard.
But the community is so split on what the "modern web app" should look like (thin client? thick client? standards-based or not? use the DOM or draw directly?) that I think it'd be much harder to gain much support for a "Hypercard for the Web" -- many web developers, possibly even a majority, would consider it to be "doing it wrong" and "teaching bad habits" _no matter what it looked like_.
- webmaven 12y agoI think I'd be fine with an opinionated partial solution, even if it wasn't too popular. But I don't really see anything like that.
- abrahamepton 12y agoWhat about Macaw? http://macaw.co/ http://macaw.co/
- webmaven 12y agoGeneral purpose design tools are again the equivalent of DTP (and very welcome), but not an app solution (unless I have completely misunderstood the audience Macaw is for).