The web is not small by any stretch of the imagination. It already privileges three different generic data structure formats: XML, JSON and data-foo tagged HTML5. It also contains support for many different image formats, including an entire animated vector graphics language, several quirks modes, an entire OpenGL stack, a low level(ish) audio API, USB support, rich text editing that is hardly used because it's too buggy ... and peer to peer video streaming. That's, like, 1/10th of what the browser alone provides. But nobody uses just the browser these days, they all add frameworks on top!
But you know, that's also fine. There's nothing wrong with large platforms, especially if the reference implementation is open source. Big platforms do more work for the developer. The problem with the web platform is that it's such a bizarre mishmash of things, often designed in isolation without any specific app driving the platform forward. So you get design-by-committee standards that may or may not be implemented on any given browser.
> The problem with the web platform is that it's such a bizarre mishmash of things, often designed in isolation without any specific app driving the platform forward. So you get design-by-committee standards that may or may not be implemented on any given browser.
That called organic growth and evolution with natural selection. I find it a much better way than a group of coders sit down in their ivory tower and lay down the "proper" way how I should do things because they know better than me. Good luck with that.
What lives or dies isn't actually chosen by natural selection. It's chosen by a variety of arcane closed-door meetings between the major browser vendors where they agree or disagree to implement each others specs.
That's still natural selection, with browser vendors executing the selection part.
The problem with the web is ultimately the same as with everything else in this industry - it's that the fitness function sucks. And that, unfortunately, is caused by economic incentives being broken, which is not a trivially fixable problem.
I feel like the "bizarre mishmash" problem is really unavoidable. Any technology that is useful enough will gain widespread acceptance. Once that happens, lots more people want it do to lots more things. You can't keep the bad ideas out. That's just the way things go. I do, however, think that mature ecosystems find a good equilibrium between consistency and completeness after a while. It seems to me that the web is beginning to approach this.
But you know, that's also fine. There's nothing wrong with large platforms, especially if the reference implementation is open source. Big platforms do more work for the developer. The problem with the web platform is that it's such a bizarre mishmash of things, often designed in isolation without any specific app driving the platform forward. So you get design-by-committee standards that may or may not be implemented on any given browser.