> We shouldn't have languages that are standard just because they are standard.
This is extraordinarily naive. Standards are a far more important invention than Javascript, or even the transistor. A standard existing just to have a standard is far better than every browser implementing its own scripting language. We had that once, in fact my personal website still has the text "This website is not compatible with MS Internet Explorer. Please upgrade to Chrome, Firefox, or Opera for optimal experience." even though that hasn't been true for over a decade.
I obviously disagree, and think that's a pretty dismissive comment.
> A standard existing just to have a standard is far better than every browser implementing its own scripting language.
We shouldn't be stuck with a language just because one person decided to invent a language in 7 days over 26 years ago for the internet at the time, and now we are stuck with that language forever with a VERY different internet. I would like to think in 10 years time we can move to a web where people have a choice of language.
And that doesn't mean what you imply - which is that every browser has it's own scripting language - because it's possible to architect an environment which allows for multiple programming languages in the browser (see bytecode, JVM, CLI, webassembly).
Is it really that naive to think that's a better way forwards?
