Seriously, I think there is a possible future where a macOS-like reactive UI toolkit is developed that compiles and deploys to the web via WASM. Maybe even a compiler that takes something like Xcode's Interface Builder's .nib files (and associated code). Microsoft tried something like that with Blazor WebAssembly. It works really well, but I think a fully data-reactive model like Apple's could be even more successful when applied to web apps.

Whatever the case, I think very few companies have reached the excellence of native macOS interface design in the context of a web app. Figma is a lone exception; for anyone else to achieve what they have, they'd have to reinvent the wheel yet again in so many small ways. (Have you noticed in Figma how moving the mouse down and to the right diagonally from a menu item to its associated submenu does not cause the menu item and submenu to be deselected? That detail, and so many others, are straight-up macOS-inspired UI craftsmanship.)

We need a reusable toolkit that lets ordinary developers achieve Figma-level UI excellence in web apps.

> Maybe even a compiler that takes something like Xcode's Interface Builder's .nib files

Please never let this happen.

Dreamweaver existed even earlier. I hope something like what you mention (flutter) does not become popular because of accessibility.

I don't agree but if you're looking for something that renderers everything in a canvas it's called Flutter https://flutter.dev/, and strangely it's made by Google, even though Flutter's success means the end of scraping the web for search.

Parent speaks the truth.

The amount of fiddling and tweaking required for web UI feels substantially higher than any GUI toolkit I’ve ever used. And I’ve used a lot of them!

I suspect this isn’t seen as a problem because Vite and friends do an amazing job of hot reload. But it is still a helluva brick wall to shipping things.

That'd be unironically simpler than the current state of things.

It would be significantly worse, unless there is a very good reason for that (e.g. some app like Photoshop could work that way).

You lose any form of accessibility, inspectability, AdBlocking won't work, in many cases even mouse select/copy-paste won't work..

I didn't say it'd be better. Just it would be simpler.

No need to learn html, css, JavaScript, bundlers, etc, etc.

You will inadvertently reinvent the browser inside a browser but worse.

Nah. There's so much stuff that would need to be implemented.

Just think of all the functionality related to text that browsers give you in HTML: styles, spellchecking, accessibility features, etc. And that's just text.

Most people would just use the most popular framework that did all that for them, while the remainder would complain loudly about the shortcomings of that framework, and we’d be right back where we started.

A11y enters the chat with their buddy "compliance"