What does WAX stand for?

In truth, it doesn't stand for anything. It's just short, gives the idea of maleability and doesn't get in the way. If you absolutely want to give it a meaning, something like Web Application eXtensions wouldn't be that far off.

How mature is it?

The project is still in its first stages. The codebase progresses quite fast though, and it's quite useful already. So... use it at your own risk: we won't take any responsability for scorched eyes or mutant APIs.

Under what license is it released?

WAX is Free Software. The core framework (python modules and generic resource set) is released under the LGPL, while resource authors can use any compatible license they feel comfortable with.

Javascript sucks... why would I write my apps in it?

Javascript has a very bad reputation. Once you get to know it though, it's actually a very flexible and expressive language that's far more capable than people would concede. Coupled with the WAX API, writing your application logic in it is a breeze.

That said, we too look forward to the day when browsers seamlessly support python, java, .Net/Mono or other similarly robust and powerful languages. When that day comes you should be able to develop your WAX components using any of those languages.

How does WAX compare to other similar platforms?

The problem with web design is apparent, and there's a clear demand for tools that enrich the end user experience and ease the effort needed by developers to create such products. Mozilla's XUL, Microsoft's XAML and Macromedia's Flex are just the more prominent incarnations of a new wave of web design tools.

• Compared to XUL, WAX has the advantadge of being cross browser. On the cons side, XUL provides near-native look and feel for your applications, which WAX isn't capable of.
• XAML won't be out for a while; for now, it's no more than an overhyped prototype. XAML is yet another attempt from Microsoft to achieve user lock in on the web, while WAX is cross-browser, cross-platform and open source, and relies on existing web standards. On the cons side, XAML will make extensive use of .Net integration, which should be a nice plus.
• Flex is based around Flash and its set of related products. That can be either fantastic or a total show stopper, depending on your taste. It's a closed-source commercial package by a single vendor, which again raises the threat of vendor lock-in. Otherwise looks like an interesting tool, if you don't mind the extra dependency on the client.