News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:Blitz: A lightweight, modular, extensible web renderer by nicoburns on Monday August 12, 2024 @02:00AM (#41221477)
I didn't submit this, but I'm the lead dev for Blitz. AMA.

One thing to note is it's not quite ready yet:

- The text input and focus system are pretty basic

- We don't support scrolling (other than the root viewport)

- Complex CSS selectors like nth-child and :has aren't working correctly yet.

- Event handling integration with Dioxus (the React-like framework that sits on top of Blitz) isn't robust or fleshed out yet (only clicks work, there is no preventDefault)

- The currently networking is super-dumb and does synchronous requests on the main thread. We need proper async and/or multithreaded networking.

- We have put very little work into performance - we're currently recomputing style/layout/paint every frame.

- Relatedly: We have few dumb memory leaks where nodes are not cleaned up. We know where these are, we just haven't fixed them yet.

- Less critical, but things like shadows, web fonts, calc, float layout, and form controls other than text input are missing (see README for more).

All of these are basically a case of "building a webview is a big task, and we haven't gotten around to that yet". We're hoping to have something a bit more complete in 2-3 months time.

There are some more screenshots here:

https://github.com/DioxusLabs/blitz/issues/23

Re:Blitz: A lightweight, modular, extensible web renderer by 9dev on Monday August 12, 2024 @02:27AM (#41221614)
Ohh, this is interesting. I'm just now looking for a solution to capture screenshots of websites, ideally from a previously crawled representation. From what I can gather, all existing offerings just run a Chromium instance and request a screenshot from that, which is pretty expensive (both in operating and as a SaaS product).

So, Blitz should be a pretty ideal fit for that, right? Can it run in headless mode and save a screenshot currently?

Re:Blitz: A lightweight, modular, extensible web renderer by nicoburns on Monday August 12, 2024 @02:39AM (#41221700)
It can't, but it'd probably only be a few hours work to add. We'd just need to plug the rendering library we're using into an image encoder rather than a windowing library. There might also be some extra work required to do tiling if you wanted a screenshot that is the full height of the HTML page (bigger than will fit in a single GPU texture), but I can't imagine that would be too hard.
Re:Blitz: A lightweight, modular, extensible web renderer by 9dev on Monday August 12, 2024 @02:45AM (#41221749)
That’d be an amazing extension with lots of potential to mix up the existing Screenshot aaS business. I’m no Rust dev, so I can’t help here, but I’ll follow the project closely!
Re:Blitz: A lightweight, modular, extensible web renderer by nkozyra on Monday August 12, 2024 @06:57AM (#41223099)
Given general css support is not complete, would you really want a screenshot of something that might look radically different on a commonly used browser?
Re:Blitz: A lightweight, modular, extensible web renderer by nicoburns on Monday August 12, 2024 @08:31AM (#41223653)
I guess perhaps such functionality will be more useful when the CSS support is more complete?
Re:Blitz: A lightweight, modular, extensible web renderer by nicoburns on Wednesday August 14, 2024 @12:52AM (#41242663)
I added an example of rendering to image today. It's a bit rough atm (not very configurable), but it seems reasonably fast.
Re:Blitz: A lightweight, modular, extensible web renderer by nwienert on Monday August 12, 2024 @03:17AM (#41221936)
You can use Playwright with Webkit, which is much lighter weight than Chrome.
Re:Blitz: A lightweight, modular, extensible web renderer by the_duke on Monday August 12, 2024 @05:06AM (#41222557)
Many websites don't render properly anymore without Javascript. A pure "html + css renderer" would probably be of limited utility for screenshotting.
Re:Blitz: A lightweight, modular, extensible web renderer by TimTheTinker on Monday August 12, 2024 @05:27AM (#41222681)
You might also look into trying Prince XML.

Its happy path is typesetting via HTML/CSS, but it may fit your use case as well.

Re:Blitz: A lightweight, modular, extensible web renderer by hougaard on Monday August 12, 2024 @03:42AM (#41222072)
How about rendering with print specific CSS to images/pdf ?
Re:Blitz: A lightweight, modular, extensible web renderer by nicoburns on Monday August 12, 2024 @07:33AM (#41223309)
Images is easy. Although we'd need to support the print-specific CSS in layout. PDF is more complex but definitely doable. It wasn't part of our initial plans but is rapidly making it's way up the priority list due to popular demand (and we are of course an open source project, so we'd be very open to people contributing PDF rendering support).
Re:Blitz: A lightweight, modular, extensible web renderer by jokoon on Monday August 12, 2024 @05:04AM (#41222549)
Personally, I would rather design a new document format, with simpler semantics, that is easier to render.

HTML feels quite complicated, and also it was not designed for dynamic rendering.

I like lean and kiss, and html doesn't feel like it's lean or simple enough for me.

Re:Blitz: A lightweight, modular, extensible web renderer by flir on Monday August 12, 2024 @06:05AM (#41222868)
How do you solve the catch 22 of "no content means no users means no content"?

*gestures vaguely at Gemini*

(serious question, because I too want that simpler, lighter version of the web).

Re:Blitz: A lightweight, modular, extensible web renderer by idle_zealot on Monday August 12, 2024 @06:27AM (#41222960)
You could write a translation or compatibility layer for web content that reduces it to your minimal version.
Re:Blitz: A lightweight, modular, extensible web renderer by notsylver on Monday August 12, 2024 @07:25AM (#41223267)
But then no one bothers implementing your document format because their existing HTML already works and it's not worth investing more time into such a small userbase, and then you're maintaining even more code
Re:Blitz: A lightweight, modular, extensible web renderer by nicoburns on Monday August 12, 2024 @07:47AM (#41223399)
That's not necessarily true. Markdown is a good example of compile-to-html format that has gained huge popularity.
Re:Blitz: A lightweight, modular, extensible web renderer by philistine on Monday August 12, 2024 @09:54AM (#41224372)
As a transitive format. There are no places full of Markdown documents to read and share, where Markdown is the final display format. It's all translated to HTML.
Re:Blitz: A lightweight, modular, extensible web renderer by flir on Monday August 12, 2024 @02:31PM (#41227777)
If you did write a "markdown over http" spec and implemented a browser for it, it would be about 15 seconds before someone reimplemeted it as a JS library.

In fact, if I was trying to build "markdown over http" I'd start with the JS library. Skip the native browser application entirely.

Re:Blitz: A lightweight, modular, extensible web renderer by 01HNNWZ0MV43FF on Monday August 12, 2024 @02:36PM (#41227830)
One problem with markdown is it's technically a superset not a subset of HTML. You can put a canvas and video that's in it. It's not a great standalone format
Re:Blitz: A lightweight, modular, extensible web renderer by meiraleal on Tuesday August 13, 2024 @04:39AM (#41233530)
MDX !== markdown
Re:Blitz: A lightweight, modular, extensible web renderer by al_borland on Monday August 12, 2024 @04:53PM (#41229209)
With any of this, isn’t it a, “build it and they will come,” situation?

Web Assembly, for example, is pretty pointless if browsers don’t support it. Browsers now support it, so it can be used, and that’s slowly happening.

It seems like the new document standard would need to be written, the benefits would need to be demonstrated, to the point support is integrated into the mainstream browsers, and then people who see benefit from the (I assume) easier/faster/better development, can start using it for new projects or integrating it into existing projects.

Trying to make an entirely new internet based on a new document standard would be rough. At this point, I don’t see that as a way forward, unless it brings something extremely compelling that users want and go crazy for, which can’t be duplicated with existing technology. I’m thinking Napster levels of hype and consumer desire.

Re:Blitz: A lightweight, modular, extensible web renderer by nicoburns on Monday August 12, 2024 @07:43AM (#41223377)
That's fair. One of the things that I hope Blitz's modular approach will enable is more experimentation around this kind of things. It should be quite easy to take the rendering support and add your own syntax or layout algorithms for example.

How feasible this is in practice remains to be. I'd be interested to see/hear what your vision would look like.

Re:Blitz: A lightweight, modular, extensible web renderer by satvikpendem on Monday August 12, 2024 @05:40AM (#41222740)
Re:Blitz: A lightweight, modular, extensible web renderer by kevincox on Monday August 12, 2024 @07:27AM (#41223284)
That sounds awful. Some of my favourite thing about the web are the semantics. This like links that have common shortcuts across all sites (like open in new tab) and a rich contect menu (send to another device, archive at archive.org). I have extensions to translate text to find URL anchors in documents.

If the web primatives where WebHID + WebGPU every site would lack any of these.

Of course this would come from the Flutter people who don't seem to care about this. Flutter on web is completely unusable and often Android and desktop versions are barely tolerable.

Re:Blitz: A lightweight, modular, extensible web renderer by satvikpendem on Monday August 12, 2024 @10:59AM (#41225188)
There's no reason extensions can't be made for it as well, HTML and CSS in the browser is just rendered via Skia anyway, so it's not much different to keep the renderer but change out the underlying languages. This is in fact exactly what Flutter does.
Re:Blitz: A lightweight, modular, extensible web renderer by mirkodrummer on Tuesday August 13, 2024 @03:45AM (#41233238)
How do you read text out of a bunch of pixels rendered on a canvas? Yes the dom is eventually rendered by Skia but still exposes an api for querying the underlying structure
Re:Blitz: A lightweight, modular, extensible web renderer by satvikpendem on Tuesday August 13, 2024 @08:33AM (#41234824)
Flutter also exposes the semantics tree via the DOM so you can actually still target elements, but yeah if you want to target the WebGPU elements, there needs to be a new API for that, which I believe there will be in the future because a lot of WebGPU renderer are coming out, in Dart, Rust, C#, etc.
Re:Blitz: A lightweight, modular, extensible web renderer by mananaysiempre on Monday August 12, 2024 @07:31AM (#41223302)
By the prominent semantic markup advocate and Web standards developer Ian “Hixie” Hickson, who now works on Flutter and, it seems, gave up on the Web. The article proposes a modern riff on the Flash VM more or less.
Re:Blitz: A lightweight, modular, extensible web renderer by satvikpendem on Monday August 12, 2024 @11:00AM (#41225197)
The HN link goes into depth on why he gave up on the web, it's quite an interesting read.
Re:Blitz: A lightweight, modular, extensible web renderer by mananaysiempre on Monday August 12, 2024 @12:22PM (#41226230)
It really is, it’s just that I don’t want to live in the world where his proposal is the main way to discover and deliver information. His solution to semantics going unused is motivated in the last paragraph, and I just can’t bring myself to feel any of the enthusiasm the writing attempts to convey:

> The parts of the web that have actually delivered are the ephemerality and the security model, the indexability (but only for content, not apps), deep linkability, and the platform-independence. We can keep all those, and throw out the decades of legacy that's holding us back, and we will lose nothing, we will only gain as we unleash the kinds of amazing interfaces that developers can build when you give them the raw bedrock APIs that other platforms already give their developers.

I also have to admit I simply don’t—can’t—trust a proposal to make the (path of least resistance of the) Web less inspectable when it comes from the general direction of Google, even when it’s honest-to-goodness Hixie writing one upon evidently deep reflection; the same way I don’t trust a proposal to make a compiler toolchain collect user data by default when it comes from that direction, even when it’s honest-to-goodness Russ Cox writing one upon evidently deep reflection.

(In the case of Go telemetry, I still remember how Cox responded to a privacy-related question I raised on HN—but don’t even remember now—by proposing the organization maintain an anonymizing proxy for its many employees. Which was a fairly satisfactory solution, if you’re an organization and have many employees. And it seemed clear his mind had no other cases in its working set. Maybe it’s just something in the air there.)

I don’t mean to pass judgment here, to be clear. Hixie in particular has done more to improve the open Web than most people whose explicit job it was to improve the open Web, let alone web programmers, let alone programmers in general (the only cohort of those to which I can lay even a vague claim of membership). I don’t even mean that my upfront bias here is correct or should be emulated by anybody.

I only mean to warn you that I’m just unable to engage with the proposal without considering its source, most of all emotionally, so you should keep that in mind when I say it and its apparent excitement feel bleak, like a coat of bright paint on a rusty playground slide in the midst of a concrete Constructivist slum.

Re:Blitz: A lightweight, modular, extensible web renderer by satvikpendem on Monday August 12, 2024 @12:29PM (#41226321)
His proposal is more for web apps, not web sites that have information on them, so the way he talks about all of those topics, like "we will only gain as we unleash the kinds of amazing interfaces that developers can build when you give them the raw bedrock APIs that other platforms already give their developers" seems much more suited to, well, interface design, rather than informational conveyance in the form of a web page. On that aspect, I agree, it's not necessary to cram a document object model into an interface design model, which is where Flutter comes from, precisely understanding that fact, and where, it seems, all the new WASM and WebGPU etc renderers are coming from too.

He also left Google yet still maintains his stance in the article, to my knowledge, if that's any consolation to you that he's not necessarily thinking about the topic from a Google lens, at least, not anymore.

Re:Blitz: A lightweight, modular, extensible web renderer by jauntywundrkind on Monday August 12, 2024 @03:45PM (#41228493)
A lot of people don't really feel like Flutter & the towards a modern web stack ideology are "web" apps. None of our extensions will work, our accessibility tools will all be broken.

It's an entirely new stack for apps unlike what the web is. Maybe that can be good for developers, maybe, perhaps, but gee it sure seems like a really bad bargain for users, user agency, and the technical legibility of our online world.

Re:Blitz: A lightweight, modular, extensible web renderer by satvikpendem on Wednesday August 14, 2024 @04:49AM (#41244045)
Yes, it's an entirely new stack, that's what the higher level commenter was talking about. I realize we've discussed this same article before but I do believe it is the way forward, for web apps at least, because the current HTML and CSS stack is really not as good as it could be, and as well, we are seeing a lot of new renderers in various languages coming out, so they'd need a new unified API. There is no reason to think that extensions would break once that new API is finished, because at the end of the day, it's all just Skia rendering the content, whether it translates from HTML or WASM.
Re:Blitz: A lightweight, modular, extensible web renderer by saurik on Thursday August 15, 2024 @04:53AM (#41254172)
I spent over a decade being the center of the ecosystem for something akin to web extensions for native Objective-C++ apps on iOS/macOS. I maintained a similar solution for Android/Java, and was starting work on something similar for C#.

The HTML/CSS web isn't some panacea for extensions. The code is minimized to the point of being obfuscated, and JavaScript engines provide almost no introspection into frames or closures. After-the-fact extending these apps is hard.

I would very honestly rather be sitting around in someone else's Flutter app with the goal of making some extension modification to the behavior than in someone's crazy DOM-based app, as at least the rules are clearer.

As it stands, though, HTML/CSS are just too complex. I could--probably alone, but certainly with a small team--build a browser that worked fully if the spec were something like WebAssembly connected directly to something like WebGPU.

The idea of a monopoly on browsers at that point would be laughable: we'd have a hundred of them, made by every company of any decent size, embedded into everything, and that spec would be both stable and would matter.

As it stands, we have like 2.5 web browsers at best, and I'm betting we are going to be down to 1.75 or so in the not-so-distant future. And yet, we continue to make the web MORE complicated to implement, which is simply demoralizing.

We can't even build a partial / limited browser renderer anymore, as progressive enhancement is dead now: if you don't support the full set of features then you'll run into modern React sites just giving up and showing a blank screen: even a browser that was fully capable just a few years ago is now dead in the water as it won't have all the crazy new CSS and JavaScript features you need.

And, why are we making this so hard? Because we think that the web is somehow more transparent than even a native app? It really isn't. There is a reason why we had tons of really invasive app behavior extensions for iOS and you almost never see anything integrated when it comes to web extensions: it is because the web's programming model is actually much more difficult to introspect and modify for anything other than superficial styling or wedged-in buttons that add mostly tacked-on behaviors.

There was someone recently on HN who went and added some feature to Gmail as an extension, and they seriously just bring up their own pane and require the user to have Oauth tokens for Gmail from their app, and the reason was because it is just too difficult to reach into Gmail and massively modify its behavior... but we would do that sort of thing on iOS all the time and it was not just easy, it was fun! Maybe a browser could be built that would give users the same kind of extension ability for the web--by ripping through all of the layers of JavaScript scope optimizations--but no one is going to ever build that as building a browser at all is an impossible task :/.

Re:Blitz: A lightweight, modular, extensible web renderer by ahoka on Monday August 12, 2024 @07:51AM (#41223415)
What the internet needs is another IPv6, sure.
Re:Blitz: A lightweight, modular, extensible web renderer by rapsey on Monday August 12, 2024 @05:28AM (#41222690)
Millions of developers know html/css
Re:Blitz: A lightweight, modular, extensible web renderer by contrarian1234 on Monday August 12, 2024 @08:56AM (#41223878)
Why not just use a markup (markdown adoc djot) + CSS?

The documents are already out there

You can probably carve out a subset of CSS that's relevant - greatly simplifying your life

Re:Blitz: A lightweight, modular, extensible web renderer by 38 on Monday August 12, 2024 @09:01AM (#41223922)
> lean and kiss

da fuq

Re:Blitz: A lightweight, modular, extensible web renderer by JasonSage on Monday August 12, 2024 @09:04AM (#41223950)
Re:Blitz: A lightweight, modular, extensible web renderer by x-complexity on Monday August 12, 2024 @09:31PM (#41231290)
Then you'll especially love Dylan Beattie's talk on this exact subject, regarding an alt-history take on the web.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8JOD1AQGqEg

Re:Blitz: A lightweight, modular, extensible web renderer by the_duke on Monday August 12, 2024 @05:10AM (#41222580)
Out of cursiosity, what's the motivation of combining a bunch of different components yourself over building on something like Servo or webkit?
Re:Blitz: A lightweight, modular, extensible web renderer by nicoburns on Monday August 12, 2024 @07:58AM (#41223446)
1. Projects like Webkit are intimidating from both a codebase size and a commit frequency POV. We don't have the expertise or the engineering bandwidth to maintain such a solution.

2. We hope that by building a modular solution we might be able to lower the barrier to entry for building browser-like software.

3. We're a lot smaller. Servo is 100mb+. Blitz is 20mb out of the box. Potentially as small as 3.5 mb with optimizations.

4. We want to be a lot more customizable. Want to add your own layout algorithms? Image formats? Build your own native widgets with custom painting and accessibility? Fit into your existing render backend? Then we want that to be possible. Don't want SVG support? or AVIF support? Or network support? Or Float support? Then you should be able to disable it and not pay the cost for it.

5. We want our components to be usable in other contexts. For example Taffy, our layout library is used in several GUI frameworks. Many of our other dependencies are also generally usable.

Re:Blitz: A lightweight, modular, extensible web renderer by rapsey on Monday August 12, 2024 @05:16AM (#41222606)
You can't remove the JavaScript engine from Servo.
Re:Blitz: A lightweight, modular, extensible web renderer by mkl on Monday August 12, 2024 @06:17AM (#41222918)
Why would that be? It seems quite unlikely to me.
Re:Blitz: A lightweight, modular, extensible web renderer by nicoburns on Monday August 12, 2024 @07:31AM (#41223305)
It uses the GC from the JS engine for it's entire DOM implementation which definitely makes it tricky. There are also some other bits you'd probably want to rip out like gstreamer for media support.

We looked at using Servo's layout support. But it isn't really designed to be used standalone (although it could be if that was prioritized!). And we'll probably add a Webrender rendering backend at some point (Blitz is designed to have pluggable renderers).

Re:Blitz: A lightweight, modular, extensible web renderer by rapsey on Monday August 12, 2024 @06:21AM (#41222939)
Because it is central. From what I understand the DOM is completely JS. Blitz is basically the project of removing JS from servo.
Re:Blitz: A lightweight, modular, extensible web renderer by rob74 on Monday August 12, 2024 @05:42AM (#41222748)
Personally I wonder what the motivation behind choosing "Blitz" as the name was. Sure, it means "flash" or "lightning" in German, but it also has some pretty negative historical connotations. E.g. if you google "blitz wikipedia english", you get "The Blitz" as the first result, which refers to the bombing campaigns of the Nazis against Great Britain during WW2 (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Blitz). Also, there is the term "Blitzkrieg" (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blitzkrieg), referring to the Nazi invasions of Poland and France.
Re:Blitz: A lightweight, modular, extensible web renderer by infotainment on Monday August 12, 2024 @06:31AM (#41222978)
That seems like kind of silly objection, why should a common German word be considered harmful because it was used for a bad thing one time?
Re:Blitz: A lightweight, modular, extensible web renderer by atombender on Monday August 12, 2024 @07:24AM (#41223258)
The word is in common use, especially terms like "ad blitz", "press blitz", etc. One of the headlines in the New York Times yesterday was "Summer Blitz Exemplifies Status of Remade Contest". A search [1] reveals many uses.

[1] https://www.nytimes.com/search?query=blitz

Re:Blitz: A lightweight, modular, extensible web renderer by notheyarent on Thursday August 15, 2024 @11:22PM (#41262866)
“ Anecdotally, my psoriasis disappeared after I switched to a strict vegetarian diet. I can't prove it, though, so I don't go on Reddit making unscientific claims I can't back up with evidence.”

There will always be exceptions like your case. However it is clearly the case that there aren’t hundreds of different types of gut fungi which grow out of control over a dysbiosis occurs in the guts microbiome. There is generally one type and it is called Candida. The problem is called a Candida overgrowth. Candida generally eats carbohydrates and sugar. A carnivore diet will generally starve it and cause a die off. The Candida generally released toxins that cause auto immune disorders.

Now I’m speaking in the cases of most not all people who experience auto immune disorders and where those disorders are caused by the guts microbiome.

There are also the cases where the gut has been damaged by gluten and other plant materials and is leaking food into the blood.

As far as I’m aware no animal flesh of any type does such damage to the gut. No fungi eats animal flesh.

You seem to think gut dysbiosis is one bacteria dominating others. No. It is a fungus in most cases. A single called yeast that rapidly duplicates called Candida and eats plants.

Unscientific only because the science is behind

Re:Blitz: A lightweight, modular, extensible web renderer by nicoburns on Monday August 12, 2024 @07:35AM (#41223326)
It's supposed to have connotations of speed. I think it's pretty commonly used in this way in English.
Re:Blitz: A lightweight, modular, extensible web renderer by miki123211 on Monday August 12, 2024 @05:54AM (#41222813)
What's your story regarding accessibility? Done? Planned? "we pretend disabled people don't exist until the government tells us otherwise"?
Re:Blitz: A lightweight, modular, extensible web renderer by nicoburns on Monday August 12, 2024 @07:39AM (#41223349)
We have the basics (exposing an accessibility tree that is visible to screen readers, a keyboard controllable focus system). There's a lot more work to do be done to make it work well (but that's also true of Blitz in general).

We're building upon https://github.com/AccessKit/accesskit which provides a cross-platform abstraction over the OS accessibility APIs.

Re:Blitz: A lightweight, modular, extensible web renderer by mwcampbell on Monday August 12, 2024 @11:22AM (#41225478)
Hi, lead AccessKit developer here. Thanks for prioritizing accessibility even at this fairly early stage of the project.
Re:Blitz: A lightweight, modular, extensible web renderer by nicoburns on Monday August 12, 2024 @05:25PM (#41229505)
Thanks for building AccessKit and making this so much easier for us!
Re:Blitz: A lightweight, modular, extensible web renderer by mkl on Monday August 12, 2024 @06:06AM (#41222872)
From the readme: "Blitz builds upon: [...] AccessKit for accessibility"
Re:Blitz: A lightweight, modular, extensible web renderer by haunter on Monday August 12, 2024 @06:02AM (#41222848)
Why are you so hostile?
Re:Blitz: A lightweight, modular, extensible web renderer by mwcampbell on Monday August 12, 2024 @10:46AM (#41225004)
I think the hostility is understandable when you consider that blind and other disabled people, like myself (I'm partially blind) and the poster of that comment, live every day having to work around widespread indifference toward our needs. I'm not immune to it myself; see some of my older HN comments on GUI toolkit accessibility, before I started AccessKit.
Re:Blitz: A lightweight, modular, extensible web renderer by nextaccountic on Tuesday August 13, 2024 @03:17AM (#41233094)
Most newer GUI libraries entirely neglect accessibility and focus exclusively on rendering. Maybe accessibility is seen as too much effort for too little gain?

It's kind like most CLI programs nowadays don't come with a man page (nor an info page) and think that an autogenerated `--help` is enough. Except that nobody is excluded from using your application just because it doesn't come with proper documentation

Re:Blitz: A lightweight, modular, extensible web renderer by wslh on Monday August 12, 2024 @06:10AM (#41222889)
Could you share what are the most complex engineering parts that you should deal with? Could you share your engineering documents even if they are just WIP?

Personally I am interested in how engines like Blitz, Servo, et al could be built in the future using formal methods practices. For example, start with definitions and generate part of the system. Nowadays, this includes LLM but I see them more like great tools than AI systems. Also things like Z3 comes to my mind.

BTW, some of my companies has a research branch on things like this.

Re:Blitz: A lightweight, modular, extensible web renderer by sandGorgon on Monday August 12, 2024 @08:15AM (#41223547)
have you built Blitz for others to build browsers on ?

I build Wootzapp (https://github.com/wootzapp/wootz-browser) - we are kind of like Robinhood for data labeling. people can spend time labeling web data/images, etc in the browser and earn. Right now we are based on Chromium. Wondering if Blitz is looking to be the pluggable renderer for other browsers.

P.S. we are on the mobile (android today and ios tomorrow).

Re:Blitz: A lightweight, modular, extensible web renderer by nicoburns on Monday August 12, 2024 @08:30AM (#41223638)
We've definitely built Blitz for other to build on. Whether it's feasible to build an entire browser on top of it... maybe. But for the being we are focusing primarily on use cases that don't need everything a full browser engine provides and can restrict themselves to a subset:

- Application UIs

- High-fidelity markdown previewing

- Perhaps PDF rendering, etc.

- Embedding web content within a wider system in an integrated way.

Etc.

It would be very cool if someone wanted to add actual JS scripting and DOM APis on top though.

Re:Blitz: A lightweight, modular, extensible web renderer by rerdavies on Monday August 12, 2024 @08:30AM (#41223637)
I get it. I did my last project with a Web UI because that's the only reasonable cross-platform UI rendering engine I could find. And on Linux, a far superior choice to GTK, which doesn't seems credible because it requires a complete reimplementation of your UI code on every major release, and QT which is held hostage by commercial interests, and licensing terms that are inscrutable.

For a UI engine for native applications, it seems like a sensible strategy: use a layout language that developers are likely to already be familiar with.

Hopefully, in the longer term, there will also be a Blitz-TML library with higher-level UI components as well.

Good luck with this. It looks interesting.