upvote
Running layout in WASM is already practical. A good demo is https://www.nicbarker.com/clay

The things you can't do are things like expose an accessibility tree (without a dummy DOM), interact with the system IME, and access system fonts.

reply
I feel like it's fair to say that you have not "fixed the issues with browser layout" if you lose accessibility and input. System fonts I can live without, we can push our own, but those two things are a big deal.

Even input you might be able to hack around but accessibility is a big deal and the "hack" at that point is nearly to both lay it out in the browser and the supposed "fixed" layout system, and while that may work in some sense I again have lots of questions about whether that is really "fixed".

reply
Nowadays I imagine OCR and vllms would solve that? Tesseract is incredibly fast and accurate.
reply
I mean, I agree it's not fixed. I guess I'm just saying it's not the layout engine that's the blocker.

FWIW, I actually think it would be much more valuable just to fix the spec and make CSS layout fast-by-default.

reply
I added DVI support to NCSA Mosaic back in 1993-94, believing it to be a better format for "rich" documents than HTML or PDF.

Nobody else seemed convinced :(

reply
pretty sure I remember reading about this with excitement and wonder ...
reply
Hard to imagine anything worse than LaTeX for web layout. Imagine resizing a page and waiting for the re-compilation of the whole page.
reply
That's part of the reason I'd find it so funny, yes.

The reason why I consider it a possibility is that LaTeX has two things out of the gate: The technical capability, and a small but arguably rabid user base. It's the sort of thing that can take an early lead but is quite unlikely to sustain it.

But you can't deny that LaTeX has had incredible staying power, despite the list of issues that everyone who uses it has with it.

reply