> But none of them require javascript to function. Node.js
>What is not a good thing is to have just one standard. That's never >good. And this is current status. Apple, Canonical, Google and Microsoft pushing their own competing front end ecosystems. And there is still HTML/JS which is portable. I see current situation very ideal. >A great deal in which javascript is used is to make cosmetic things pop >in your browser that you really doesn't need for getting what you need: >information. Not all applications are for that. Let's say, numerical analysis software, video conferencing, electrical planning software.. or how about IDE with realtime code analysis? It is very useful to see bugs while I write code without need to compile. It is even useful in Word Processing to have real time spell checking. These are not just cosmetic things. >The problem with javascript, that we are pointing and you're not listening, >is that you don't control what is run. Of course I control. It very possible to white list / black list domains. It possible to limit all scripts to be launched from same trusted domain where I launch application. It is possible to install whole application to own server if I want. It is possible to put whole application instance to sandbox and require permission to camera, or limit memory usage. All data client sends is possible to control and monitor. In security point of view, who manages server can't control what happens in client side. Client is always untrusted and input need to check. Client however can't control what happens in server. Client have to trust server where data is send. Everything else can be controlled. >even then, you would probably be using an app. And JS is for making app.
