The web app is the app. A browser is a mini OS at this point.

That's what web devs like to pretend. Then they are surprised when browser developers continue developing their browsers.

If you want to develop an app, develop an app, not a website. Use Electron or its mobile equivalents if you must.

So you are saying that pinch and double tap should just be removed from js specs because one company arbitrarily decided you can't use them anymore. Whatever.

Also, MS office and Adobe are web apps and far more complex than almost any "real apps" out there. It's completely untrue that web apps are not apps.

No, I think JS as a whole should be removed completely independently of what any company decided. Websites in general aren't trustworthy, which means they can't be trusted to determine the browser's behaviour.

> Also, MS office and Adobe are web apps and far more complex than almost any "real apps" out there. It's completely untrue that web apps are not apps.

You can pretend they are until someone takes away your toys. Then, suddenly, your "app" cannot even process its own input. Or access the clipboard. Or do any of the other things that websites just aren't trustworthy enough for.

There is nothing that makes an installed app, with higher permissions, more trustworthy than a web app. Getting rid of js altogether is just throwing away the web to make it something poorly performing and requires sending all data back to the server - so not really a serious option. Browsers only exist to allow interaction with websites, and as such they should follow specs and allow them to be used. Websites are more important than browsers by definition.

> There is nothing that makes an installed app, with higher permissions, more trustworthy than a web app.

Yes, there is. The fact the user has installed it.

> Getting rid of js altogether is just throwing away the web to make it something poorly performing and requires sending all data back to the server - so not really a serious option.

Not the web, just webapps. The web will perform better afterwards.

> Browsers only exist to allow interaction with websites, and as such they should follow specs and allow them to be used.

Yes, but those specs have to be sane. Which means even a completely untrusted party – that's what a random website is – cannot abuse them.

> Websites are more important than browsers by definition.

Nonsense, either is useless without the other. Websites are content, browsers define how they're viewed.