Tried the first demo. Couldn't select text. Couldn't right-click. Scrolling didn't work.

I predict this will be what news sites are built on a few years from now in order to "protect" their content.

The technology itself is amazing, and as long as it was used for replacement for desktop and mobile ask it would be great, but I have the same fear that it might replace proper web sites.

Hopefully the need to be discoverable by search engines will mean that most sites will still use the dom, but at some point Google might provide a proprietary crawling interface...

I don't believe it's meant to be a replacement for interactive web pages but as a browser-based viewer for QT's file format. With that in mind, your qualms aren't quite applicable here.

Select? Right-click?

It's not enabled in the properties of the elements by default, so it's not selectable by default because it's a GUI, not a web document. Web developers have forgotten what an app is while trying to write apps by using tools meant for Web documents.

There was a TextEdit example where you select text.

Well there is this in the post-

"Please try out the Qt Design Viewer, but keep in mind that this is a technical preview. Bugs and issues can be reported here. The viewer application is fully open source."

So bugs are expected.

The difference is that this is native. Super exciting.

If I make a form in QT and compile it to Webassembly with this tool, will I get native Windows form elements on Windows and native OSX form elements on OSX? Or will I get the browser form elements? Or QT form inputs regardless of the OS I'm viewing it with?

Looking at the sliders in the sidemenu example (http://qt-webassembly.io/designviewer/#SideMenu.qmlrc), they look like QT sliders rather than anything OS or browser native.

Sorry, I meant native to the browser. Flash had to be installed on your machine, but WASM is built into browsers and exists as a web standard.

Even though the core runtime is a web standard, I would say this performs worse in every other way. The entire rendering stack has to run in a VM.

Yeah, that makes more sense.

It's funny what 'native' is nowadays - it's relatively... 'native' - e.g. flash was really 'native', as in no wasm/jits whatever.

But is it funky, dirty native? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9mXe9nRiPHI