Reading between the lines, it seems like the committee's aim is to take something that is widely understood and used, broadly capable, and in the big picture relatively well-defined (i.e. the Web), and incorporate it into the C++ standard by reference.
The problem is that the *relationship of web content to surrounding native app code* is none of those things, and I think you could make a case that it's been undergoing violent churn for years and years. On Fri, Jul 20, 2018 at 10:04 AM, Botond Ballo <bba...@mozilla.com> wrote: > On Thu, Jul 19, 2018 at 5:35 PM, Mike Hommey <m...@glandium.org> wrote: > > Other than everything that has already been said in this thread, > > something bugs me with this proposal: a web view is a very UI thing. > > And I don't think there's any proposal to add more basic UI elements > > to the standard library. > > Not that I'm aware of. > > > So even if a web view is a desirable thing in > > the long term (and I'm not saying it is!), there are way more things > > that should come first. > > I think the idea behind this proposal is that standardizing a UI > framework for C++ would be too difficult (seeing as we couldn't even > agree on a 2D graphics proposal, which is an ingredient in a UI > framework), so the web view fills the role of the UI framework: your > UI is built inside the web view. (Not saying that's a good idea or a > bad idea, just trying to explain the line of thinking.) > > Cheers, > Botond > _______________________________________________ > dev-platform mailing list > dev-platform@lists.mozilla.org > https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-platform > _______________________________________________ dev-platform mailing list dev-platform@lists.mozilla.org https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-platform
