Funny there is already a (less advanced) open source application that does this... with the same name :)<p><a href="https://github.com/hbbio/webshell" rel="nofollow">https://github.com/hbbio/webshell</a><p>Disclaimer: I'm the author of the open source webshell.
Cool interface but I'm not sure what sort of value you're going for here.<p>Is it a set of APIs that make it easier to get stuff done in a repl? If so, it doesn't seem more useful than console so far (looking at the Google Maps and HTTP call examples). Or is it a lightweight IDE -- if so, would this be better done as a browser extension that could circumvent security restrictions? (and also operate on any document, including those served from localhost)<p>I really like it intuitively, but also, I don't get it.
This does seem to need more of a sell. Intuitively it feels cool - but then I’m not sure of what I’d use it for.<p>My first thought was that it’s the other half of the <a href="https://www.webscript.io/" rel="nofollow">https://www.webscript.io/</a>
The prototyping shows an example with Twitter but the API Explorer doesn't have Twitter as an option, why not?<p>Also, with only eight services available having both Latest and Popular tabs in the API Explorer is probably premature. Until all the services need a second screen/page down just show Everything.<p>Use the hover event to show some sort of highlights box about the API, otherwise make the service icons smaller so more fit for page and at least use the Bootstrap tooltip component to show the service name.<p>Once you have more than that perhaps add tabs and show the four most recent additions as Latest as the second tab.<p>Once there are more than 30 or so Popular might be a useful third tab.<p>Price: What is this going to cost? Can't be free for all uses forever, even if that's true now so at least state that it's 'free while in beta' or similar. Most HNers will agree that a service that's useful is worth paying some amount for to ensure it stays around, after all.<p>Robustness: You aim to have developers build in a dependency on Webshell but have nothing posted about your infrastructure, uptime or security policies, not even links to privacy policy and terms of service pages.<p>Bottom line for me is that I think this is very interesting and potentially very useful but beyond using as a playground there's a lot of work yet to do before IMO there can be serious adoption.
Hey I think it's a great idea. I'm a developer evangelist at TokBox and I love playing around with APIs so I think I'll be using this tool quite often. Personally, I think you can create alot more value by opening up a platform so that API companies can write their own interactions into WebShell. This way it's more scalable and we'll be able to do cool mashups with other APIs.
I want a self-hosted version. Badly.<p>Seriously, if you sold this as software that I could run anywhere, it would absolutely make my day. The libraries you guys have written are seriously impressive.<p>You could use this kind of technology for a more meaningful way to teach code - when you're done, you've written yourself a website.<p>Also, providing an external "API to rule them all" would be pretty cool, as well.
Typos, "program the web", I'm not sure what all this means.<p>edit: I think what we have here is a library that unifies a bunch of APIs, which is cool, and a programmable service which can run scripts for you. You offload API calls to to this service and then can call them from your app and get your customized data. That could be useful.
This is quite cool to play with - nice work.<p>May I suggest you give the tutorials a solid proof read? There are quite a few typos in the first few pages.<p>"This APIs is really simple"
"Webshell make it simpler."<p>Also, waaaay too many smiley faces.