Yeah, if you were to design HTML, CSS, and JS from the ground up today they'd likely look very different.

The bigger issue is backwards compatibility; the web has bent over backwards to maintain it, which is a blessing and a curse. On the one hand it makes the feature set absurd, but on the other hand the web is (relatively) easy to archive since format interpreters for it are widespread, and pages can be built and then forgotten about because they still work.

> Yeah, if you were to design HTML, CSS, and JS from the ground up today they'd likely look very different.

I'd like to see that experiment done.

This is sort of what Flutter claims to be.

Flutter is a GUI toolkit, it's a different use case entirely with some small overlap (flutter can run on the web or could be used to build the front-end for a new browser)

I think he's referring to the fact that Flutter was started as a project, by some of Google's browser and web standards people, to see what the could come up with if they designed a browser from scratch with the knowledge we have today.

This is talked about in a few videos and articles by it's creators.

WASM does seem to be on the road to eventually being a better JS.

I wish WASM was AST based instead of stack based architecture.

What does that statement mean? As far as i know stack VS AST is Apple VS. Oranges. If you meant a register based architecture that would make sense. I don't know is wasm code is verifiable, in which case it's trivial to rewrite it to a register like architecture (like dalvik does for jvm bytecode).

I think we can drop all non-flexbox layout without any degradation in functionality.

You mean grid? I'm suspect you can emulate most if not all of flexbox in grid, but definitely not vice-versa.