>>21,22
I didn't think anyone would take that seriously enough to reply but "webhdl" will probably be certain companies have their own "web platform" for "cheap" hardware production that's using some horrific proprietary hdl or common hdl with vendor specific extensions as you said, which they have the ide on site written in atom or whatever the webui of the day is, that you must use for some reason.
Hdls already have a major toolchain problem, this will happen naturally with all the risc-v hardware design sites popping up, if they ever allow ic modifications using a hdl.
(as a Hegelian) dialectically
Your replies were more interesting then mine but calling it the next norm was pushing it for fun. The major players using their own maintained versions and toolchains won't be switching to a "webdoc" development style, even if they are the ones running the "web platform" for everyone else.
I think that would be something like web assembly implemented in hardware
Some s930x cpcs run java byte code more directly as machine code already, funny chromebooks and webphones don't do this yet with some type of ir ecmascript "byte code", then support something declarative style opcode enhancements™ for html and css on the side. I don't know how the last part would work generically like that.
In this world everything would be sort of tacitly modified by the assumptions of the WWW, but WWW would in some sense remain distinct, sort of like how UNIX tacitly modifies anything that runs in its environment
I'm not sure it will stay completely distinct with how the www currently is and unlike single research sconix™ the www exists as a single defined theory, until terms like web 2.x start being used. Xanadu defines the theory, isc defined the more terrible base standards and diverts like single unix on steroids, until you look at how it is today, it's mostly different and worse. Otherwise history is repeating it's self again.