Open web standards are great but consider where we could have been if competition drove them a different way? We're still stuck with JavaScript today (wasm still needs it). Layout/styling is caught up now but where would we be if that came sooner?
It's not that it's a problem I just don't think it's the best place to be. It was not designed to be used like this. Yes, it's better now but it's still not great - you still ship JS as text blobs that need to be parsed and compiled by every browser.
I don't see how alternatives to JavaScript are a risk to open web standards. WebAssembly is itself a part of those same standards. It's just a shame that it was built as an extension of JavaScript instead of being an actual alternative.
Though in principle they serve similar purposes there are some big differences though. Python with types is still just python. Typescript is a different language from JS (guess it a superset?) and it being controlled by a large company could be considered problematic.
I suppose JS could go in the same direction and adopt the typing syntax from TS as a non-runtime thing. Then the typescript compiler would become something like mypy, an entirely optional part of the ecosystem.
> Open web standards are great but consider where we could have been if competition drove them a different way? We're still stuck with JavaScript today (wasm still needs it). Layout/styling is caught up now but where would we be if that came sooner?
Why do you think JavaScript is a problem? And a big enough problem to risk destroying open web standards.