Now QML has its warts for sure, but it benefits from being designed with well-known use cases in mind, so it has lots of features suitable to them.

HTML was designed for structured, flowing text documents and everything else got bolted on top with only partial awareness of where the journey was headed (reading up on the origins of stylesheets and the relevant discussions is interesting in this respect). As a result it's just a mess for what it's used for now, pain-alleviating salves like flexbox notwithstanding.

When I do any non-trivial UI in the web stack, I can feel I am in continuous workaround territory. I'm trying to bend something ill-suited to my will. I don't get that feeling with QML.

> When I do any non-trivial UI in the web stack, I can feel I am in continuous workaround territory. I'm trying to bend something ill-suited to my will. I don't get that feeling with QML.

That has been my experience as well.

I think the web dev crowd advocating HTML/CSS originates in a) limited knowledge beyond the web tech field, and/or b) thinking that web is the state-of-the-art of computing.

The trouble with modern web is, that it was not so much designed as it evolved. But evolution in general is doggone slow and produces mistakes and mutations. I think the evolution of the web platform is still in a very early phase.