And what sort of interactivity? Does backend logic count, or only logic in the browser? If only the latter - why does that matter, but not the former? Does any site that uses javascript qualify, regardless of how little?

Hacker News uses javascript, so is it a "web app" and not a "web site?" Would it suddenly become a webapp if the mods hit their heads and decided in a fever delirium to turn the whole thing into a SPA, despite it having the exact same functionality?

In this model, would YC have to publish the static pages of HN on the "static" web but the forum on the "dynamic" web? But what if they cache the threads? Now they're static as well. And having every web developer divide their attention and work between two platforms based on which part of it is "static" and which part is "dynamic" seems needlessly complex and confusing.

I sympathize with the idea - HTML and javascript are terrible for building applications, but if you want the web to only be static HTML files then your "new" platform is going to contain almost every website in existence, including most of the brochure sites, articles and "legacy stuff." Most web apps are also documents, few are strictly one or the other.

It would make more sense to bifurcate the web along WASM, because that will lead to the distinction between HTML and compiled binaries (which, I know, we've already been there with Flash and Java) both in the browser. But even then, WASM is intended to work within the context of javascript and HTML, not necessarily to stand alone.