Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

AXR: A better(?) alternative to HTML+CSS

axr.vg

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

51–60 of 65 posts

Re: AXR: A better(?) alternative to HTML+CSS

#51

Post by tambourine_man »

veosotano wrote: post #47
tambourine_man wrote: post #38

Earlier quoted context omitted.

By the time you have a working C++ implementation, for all you know v8 and SpiderMonkey's optimizers will be generating code just as fast as your C++. I dont think that's going to happen anytime soon. But I agree that JavaScript is the way to go with this. The prize is not that high to justify such a steep adoption curve. I mean "make A as wide as B is high" can be accomplished in javascript today.

The goals of the project are way beyond just making "A as wide as B is high". That is just a drop in the ocean. Once we do effects (such as shadows, blur, noise, etc) and more advanced processing we'll need as much performance as we can.

I think you need better marketing, then. I glanced over the page and didn't see anything that “wowed” me. I think that's needed to justify the effort.

Re: AXR: A better(?) alternative to HTML+CSS

#52

Post by chc »

veosotano wrote: post #33
mambodog wrote: post #27

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Once flexbox, grids and calc come out as official specs, you'll still have to wait until all browsers implements them, and then wait again until enough users update How would the situation be any different for AXR?

The plan is to make the rendering engine an auto-updateable library, that's independent of the browser's release schedule. Thus, users would stay current faster. On the other hand, there will be a versioning system, so that authors can specify what version of the technology they are targeting. So if the spec changes, compatibility modules can be created akin to how Adobe apps open documents differently if they are CS…

This sounds like something we already have. I don't want this to sound confrontational, since I know the F-word is viewed as kind of "dirty" around here, but how is what you're proposing substantially different from Flash?

Re: AXR: A better(?) alternative to HTML+CSS

#53

Post by veosotano »

chc wrote: post #52
veosotano wrote: post #33

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The plan is to make the rendering engine an auto-updateable library, that's independent of the browser's release schedule. Thus, users would stay current faster. On the other hand, there will be a versioning system, so that authors can specify what version of the technology they are targeting. So if the spec changes, compatibility modules can be created akin to how Adobe apps open documents differently if they are CS…

This sounds like something we already have. I don't want this to sound confrontational, since I know the F-word is viewed as kind of "dirty" around here, but how is what you're proposing substantially different from Flash?

Well for starters its open source instead of proprietary. I think that already deserves some respect on its own.

Then, this is based on doing websites in the web standards spirit of using plain-text files, where multiple components are linked together, and having the semantic content (XML) separated from the presentation (HSS).

I mean, we like the concept of HTML+CSS, but we would like to see many of its flaws and shortcomings corrected.

Re: AXR: A better(?) alternative to HTML+CSS

#54

Post by veosotano »

tambourine_man wrote: post #51
veosotano wrote: post #47

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The goals of the project are way beyond just making "A as wide as B is high". That is just a drop in the ocean. Once we do effects (such as shadows, blur, noise, etc) and more advanced processing we'll need as much performance as we can.

I think you need better marketing, then. I glanced over the page and didn't see anything that “wowed” me. I think that's needed to justify the effort.

The people that I usually see getting wowed are web designers and devs, that know the pains of dealing with all those issues that this project is trying to solve. I don't know your background, but if you don't do CSS you probably don't know or care about all the troubles that one has to go through to get your site working correctly across all browsers, laying out your page (most apparent in fluid designs, or with dynamic content from a database), etc.

And again, we would love to hear about how we can market ourselves better, we are all ears!

Re: AXR: A better(?) alternative to HTML+CSS

#55

Post by veosotano »

kombine wrote: post #29

Have you guys looked into Qt's QML? It is already there and addresses the same problems that you are trying to. All it needs is some more publicity.

I've looked at it and it seems to share goals with AXR, but how good is it for semantics, accessibility and backwards-compatibility? Those are quite essential requirements.

Re: AXR: A better(?) alternative to HTML+CSS

#56

Post by icebraining »

The terms to use and redistribute all source code for the AXR project WILL CHANGE in the future, since it will include clauses not included in any of the available free software licenses, mostly in aspects that will ensure the integrity of AXR as a web publishing platform.

This is worrying. What exactly are you expecting to put in such clauses? Anything more restrictive than Apache v2 (like the current license, GPL) is 100% sure to rule out inclusion in some browsers.

Re: AXR: A better(?) alternative to HTML+CSS

#57

Post by extension »

kennystone wrote: post #42

If you are going to start from scratch, why would you ever use XML? XML violates so many things we know to be good, including the essential lisp idea of 'data is code' (which json does OK), not to mention it's ugly, hard to read, and makes for arbitrary patterns.

The one thing XML is great it, as the name suggests, is markup. And I am in favor of marked up text continuing as the basic model for content in any next generation web platform.

Re: AXR: A better(?) alternative to HTML+CSS

#58

Post by veosotano »

icebraining wrote: post #56

The terms to use and redistribute all source code for the AXR project WILL CHANGE in the future, since it will include clauses not included in any of the available free software licenses, mostly in aspects that will ensure the integrity of AXR as a web publishing platform. This is worrying. What exactly are you expecting to put in such clauses? Anything more restrictive than Apache v2 (like the current license, GPL)…

What I wanted to put in the final license was something along the lines of "an implementation of the specification is only granted the permission to use the technology if at the time of being released (out of beta) it is absolutely compliant with the specification, obtaining a 100% score on all the tests released by the official AXR community", to be able to ensure that we don't end up in the same situation as now, in case other implementations appear.

This obviously needs to be studied and discussed to great extent, but I put the warning in the current licensing text to not have anyone think that it will be the final license...

What do you think, would you agree with that idea? If not, why not?

Re: AXR: A better(?) alternative to HTML+CSS

#59

Post by hallmark »

On an emotional level, XML is annoying.

XML is strict and unforgiving - great for validation, tools, and stuffing into SOAP envelopes. OTOH, for all of HTML's warts, it is flexible and forgiving to humans. Great developers and designers want to be happy working with their creations, and WYSIWYG tools often do not fit the process. So when you are forced to work with markup by hand, the perceived friendliness and ease of the markup language is significant.

In the end, to each their own. But programming languages are a popularity contest. Especially new ones.

Re: AXR: A better(?) alternative to HTML+CSS

#60

Post by [deleted] »

veosotano wrote: post #58
icebraining wrote: post #56

The terms to use and redistribute all source code for the AXR project WILL CHANGE in the future, since it will include clauses not included in any of the available free software licenses, mostly in aspects that will ensure the integrity of AXR as a web publishing platform. This is worrying. What exactly are you expecting to put in such clauses? Anything more restrictive than Apache v2 (like the current license, GPL)…

What I wanted to put in the final license was something along the lines of "an implementation of the specification is only granted the permission to use the technology if at the time of being released (out of beta) it is absolutely compliant with the specification, obtaining a 100% score on all the tests released by the official AXR community", to be able to ensure that we don't end up in the same situation as now, i…

[deleted]
Post reply on HN