--- title: Technical Blueprint for a Minimal AnyWidget Host Environment using FastHTML permalink: /futureproof/fasthtml-anywidget-host/ description: In this report, I've laid out a technical blueprint exploring the feasibility of using the FastHTML web framework to create a minimal environment for hosting `anywidget` widgets. I dove into `anywidget`'s architecture and the AFM specification, examined Marimo's native hosting approach as a reference, and assessed FastHTML's suitability, ultimately proposing an architecture based on WebSockets to bridge the gap between `anywidget`'s stateful model and FastHTML's server-centric design, while highlighting the key implementation challenges and research questions involved in making this integration robust. meta_description: Technical blueprint for hosting anywidget widgets in a minimal FastHTML environment using WebSockets, bypassing Jupyter infrastructure. Analyzes AFM spec & state synchronization challenges. meta_keywords: anywidget, FastHTML, AFM, Anywidget Front-End Module, minimal host, custom hosting, WebSockets, ASGI, Starlette, Uvicorn, HTMX integration, widget hosting, Jupyter alternative, Marimo, ipywidgets alternative, state synchronization, traitlets, comm protocol, Python web framework, interactive widgets, technical blueprint, feasibility study, Python javascript bridge, ESM module, ui component hosting layout: post sort_order: 4 --- {% raw %} ## Interactive Widgets in Programming Environments Imagine developers creating small, interactive tools (like sliders, buttons, or simple charts) called "widgets" that can be used inside programming environments like digital notebooks (e.g., `Jupyter Notebooks`). A library called `anywidget` makes creating these widgets easier and allows them to work in various standard environments. However, running these widgets outside of those standard, often complex, environments poses a challenge. ## Exploring FastHTML for AnyWidget Hosting This article explores the technical possibility of getting these `anywidget` tools to run within a different, more lightweight web framework called `FastHTML`. The goal is to create a "minimal host" – a simpler setup that avoids the heavy infrastructure of traditional environments like `Jupyter`. ## Technical Specifications and Learning from Marimo It investigates how this might be achieved by looking at the technical specifications involved (like `AFM`), learning from another system called `Marimo` that already does this, and outlining a plan (a blueprint) for making it work in `FastHTML`, while also considering the difficulties involved. --- ## **1. Introduction** ### **1.1. Overview of anywidget** The `anywidget` library represents a significant advancement in the development of interactive widgets for computational environments. It aims to simplify the authoring process compared to traditional `Jupyter Widgets`, which often involve complex `cookiecutter` templates and build tooling.1 `anywidget` allows developers to create reusable web-based widgets, package them as standard Python libraries distributable via `PyPI`, and prototype rapidly within notebooks or Python files.2 A core design goal is portability, enabling these widgets to function across various interactive computing platforms that support the `Jupyter Widgets` protocol, such as `Jupyter Notebook`, `JupyterLab`, `Google Colab`, `VS Code`, and notably, the reactive notebook environment `Marimo`.1 ### **1.2. The Challenge of Custom Hosting** While `anywidget` achieves broad compatibility within the established Jupyter ecosystem 1, deploying these widgets in alternative or custom environments presents a technical challenge. Standard environments rely on a suite of components including a Jupyter kernel (like `ipykernel`), the `ipywidgets` library, and frontend extensions (`widgetsnbextension` or `jupyterlab_widgets`) to manage communication and rendering.1 Hosting `anywidget` outside this ecosystem necessitates creating a new "host environment" that fulfills the requirements of the underlying `anywidget` specification, particularly the `Anywidget Front-End Module` (`AFM`) standard.10 The `AFM` specification defines the contract between the widget's frontend code and the environment hosting it. ### **1.3. Motivation for Minimalist Hosting** There is a growing interest in deploying interactive widgets within more lightweight, specialized web environments that avoid the full dependency stack of Jupyter. This often involves eliminating components like `ipykernel` 11, `widgetsnbextension` 9, `jupyterlab_widgets` 9, the `ZeroMQ` messaging layer 13, and complex JavaScript build toolchains sometimes associated with classic `Jupyter Widgets` development.2 The goal is to achieve faster load times, reduced complexity, easier deployment, and better integration with modern web frameworks that may not be Jupyter-centric. ### **1.4. FastHTML as a Candidate Host** `FastHTML` emerges as an intriguing candidate for creating such a minimal host environment. It is a modern Python web framework built on `ASGI`, `Starlette`, and `Uvicorn`, designed for building scalable web applications with minimal code.15 Its core philosophy emphasizes Python-centric development, representing HTML using Python objects (`Fast Tags` or `FT`) and leveraging `HTMX` for dynamic UI updates via server-rendered HTML partials, thereby minimizing the need for client-side JavaScript frameworks.15 This aligns well with the goal of a minimal, Python-focused host environment. ### **1.5. Marimo as a Benchmark** The `Marimo` notebook environment provides a valuable benchmark. `Marimo` is explicitly designed as a reactive notebook system and notably offers *native* support for the `AFM` specification, allowing `anywidget` widgets to run directly within it without the traditional Jupyter infrastructure.6 Analyzing how `Marimo` achieves this native hosting provides crucial insights for designing a similar capability within `FastHTML`. ### **1.6. Report Goal** This report provides a comprehensive technical blueprint and feasibility analysis for creating a minimal `anywidget` host environment using the `FastHTML` framework. It delves into the architecture of `anywidget` and the `AFM` specification, examines `Marimo`'s implementation strategy, analyzes `FastHTML`'s suitability, outlines a proposed architecture for the `FastHTML` host, discusses implementation challenges, and identifies key questions for further research. The aim is to equip developers with the technical understanding needed to pursue such an integration. The central technical challenge explored herein lies in integrating `anywidget`'s inherently stateful, bidirectional communication model—derived from the `Jupyter Widgets` protocol—into `FastHTML`'s architectural paradigm, which is predominantly characterized by server-side rendering, stateless request handling facilitated by `HTMX`, and minimal client-side state management. `anywidget` relies on mechanisms like `traitlets` and the `comm` protocol for synchronizing state between its Python backend and JavaScript frontend.1 `FastHTML`, conversely, typically manages interactions through `HTMX`, where client actions trigger HTTP requests and the server responds with HTML fragments to update the DOM.15 `Marimo`'s successful native `AFM` implementation 10 demonstrates that hosting outside Jupyter is viable. However, `Marimo`'s reactive nature, where state changes automatically propagate through a dependency graph 32, likely provides a more natural fit for `AFM`'s state synchronization model compared to `FastHTML`'s request-response pattern. Therefore, creating a `FastHTML` host requires not only implementing the `AFM` interface but also carefully designing mechanisms to reconcile these differing approaches to state management and interaction. ## **2. anywidget Deep Dive** ### **2.1. Core Architecture** Understanding `anywidget` requires examining its distinct backend and frontend components and how they interact. * **Backend (Python):** The foundation of an `anywidget` is a Python class that inherits from `anywidget.AnyWidget`.1 This class serves as the backend representation of the widget. Crucially, it utilizes the `traitlets` library to define stateful properties. Properties intended to be synchronized between the Python backend and the JavaScript frontend are declared as `traitlets` attributes tagged with `sync=True`.1 Changes to these properties in Python trigger updates to the frontend, and vice versa. The Python class is also responsible for specifying the frontend assets, typically through class attributes like `_esm` (pointing to the main JavaScript ECMAScript Module) and `_css` (pointing to associated stylesheets). These can be provided as inline strings or as paths to external files.1 * **Frontend (JavaScript/AFM):** The frontend counterpart is implemented as a standard JavaScript ECMAScript Module (ESM) that must adhere to the `Anywidget Front-End Module` (`AFM`) specification.3 This module contains the logic for rendering the widget's user interface and handling user interactions. The `AFM` specification mandates that the module exports specific functions, most notably `render({ model, el })`. The `render` function receives two critical arguments from the host environment: `el`, the DOM element container where the widget should render itself, and `model`, an object representing the backend state and providing methods for interaction.3 The frontend code uses `model.get("property_name")` to read state, `model.set("property_name", value)` to propose state changes back to the Python backend, and `model.save_changes()` to signal that changes should be persisted.3 `model.on("change:property_name", callback)` allows the frontend to react to state updates originating from the backend. While plain JavaScript is sufficient, `anywidget` also provides optional framework bridges for libraries like `React` and `Svelte`, allowing developers to leverage these tools for building the widget's frontend while still conforming to the `AFM` specification.4 ### **2.2. Communication Protocol** The communication between the `anywidget` backend (Python) and frontend (JavaScript) relies on established Jupyter protocols. * **Jupyter Widgets Protocol:** `anywidget` fundamentally utilizes the standard `Jupyter Widgets message passing protocol`.1 This protocol defines how messages are structured and exchanged between the kernel (backend) and the frontend environment to keep widget states synchronized. The protocol supports synchronizing widget model attributes and handling custom messages.31 * **comm Objects:** At a lower level, the `Jupyter Widgets` protocol is implemented using `comm` objects. The `ipython/comm` library provides the reference implementation in Python.35 In a typical Jupyter setup, `comm` objects manage communication channels between the kernel process and the frontend (e.g., `JupyterLab` running in the browser). These channels often utilize `ZMQ` for inter-process communication between the kernel and the Jupyter server, and `WebSockets` for communication between the server and the browser frontend.13 `anywidget`'s experimental `MimeBundleDescriptor` attempts to leverage this `comm` machinery to enable widget communication for arbitrary Python objects, not just those inheriting from `ipywidgets.Widget`.34 * **traitlets Synchronization:** The `traitlets` library plays a pivotal role in automating state synchronization.1 When a traitlet attribute is marked with `sync=True` in the `anywidget.AnyWidget` subclass, the library automatically observes changes to that attribute in Python. When a change occurs, `traitlets` serializes the new value and sends an update message over the appropriate `comm` channel to the frontend. Conversely, when the frontend modifies a synchronized property using `model.set()` and `model.save_changes()`, a message is sent back to the Python kernel, where `traitlets` deserializes the value and updates the corresponding Python attribute.1 This mechanism ensures that the state remains consistent across both environments. ### **2.3. Standard Host Requirements (Jupyter Ecosystem)** Running `anywidget` within its standard Jupyter ecosystem context requires several interacting components: * **Jupyter Kernel:** An execution backend, typically `ipykernel` for Python, which runs the user's code and the widget's Python logic.1 The kernel manages the `comm` objects for communication. * **ipywidgets Library:** The core `Jupyter Widgets` library, providing the base `Widget` class and foundational infrastructure.9 While `anywidget` aims to simplify widget *creation*, it still relies on the underlying communication protocol established by `ipywidgets`. * **Frontend Extensions:** Specific JavaScript packages are needed in the frontend environment to manage widget rendering and communication. For the classic `Jupyter Notebook`, this is `widgetsnbextension`.8 For `JupyterLab`, it's `jupyterlab_widgets`.8 These packages contain the necessary JavaScript to interpret the `application/vnd.jupyter.widget-view+json` MIME type, instantiate widget views, and connect them to the kernel via `comm` channels over `WebSockets`. * **Jupyter Frontend:** A user interface like `JupyterLab`, `Jupyter Notebook`, `VS Code`'s Jupyter extension, or `Google Colab`, which provides the environment to display notebooks and render the widget views managed by the frontend extensions.1 Creating a minimal host necessitates replacing or bypassing much of this standard Jupyter infrastructure, particularly the kernel (`ipykernel`) and specific frontend extensions (`widgetsnbextension`, `jupyterlab_widgets`).8 The standard setup involves multiple packages and distinct communication layers (e.g., `WebSockets` between browser and server, potentially `ZMQ` between server and kernel).13 `anywidget`'s `AFM` standard primarily simplifies the widget's *frontend* definition.7 However, standard hosting still depends on the Jupyter *backend* communication infrastructure (`comm`, `ipykernel`).1 The objective of a minimal host, as per the user query, is precisely to reduce these dependencies. Therefore, the central task is to substitute the communication and state synchronization mechanisms typically provided by `ipykernel`/`comm`/`traitlets` with custom implementations within the new host environment, such as `FastHTML`. ## **3. The Anywidget Front-End Module (AFM) Specification** The `AFM` specification is central to `anywidget`'s goal of portability and simplified widget development. It defines a standard contract between the widget's frontend JavaScript code and the environment hosting it. ### **3.1. Design Goals** * **Portability:** The primary goal of `AFM` is to enable widget frontend code to be written once and run across diverse interactive computing environments. This includes traditional Jupyter platforms (`JupyterLab`, `Jupyter Notebook`, `Google Colab`, `VS Code`) as well as newer or alternative platforms like `Marimo` and dashboarding libraries like `Panel`.5 This contrasts with the traditional `Jupyter Widgets` approach, which often required platform-specific adaptations.5 * **Minimalism:** `AFM` deliberately focuses on a minimal set of essential APIs required for a host platform to integrate a widget. These core requirements boil down to two fundamental capabilities: enabling bidirectional communication between the frontend and the backend (host), and providing a mechanism for the frontend to modify the user interface (DOM manipulation) within its designated output area.10 Crucially, `AFM` avoids prescribing specific UI rendering libraries (like `React`, `Svelte`) or state management patterns within the specification itself, leaving those choices to the widget developer and facilitating integration through optional framework bridges.6 ### **3.2. Host Responsibilities** To be AFM-compatible, a host environment must fulfill the following responsibilities: * **Load ESM:** The host must be capable of loading the widget's frontend code, which is provided as a standard ECMAScript Module (ESM).5 Given that modern web browsers natively support ESM imports, this requirement ensures broad compatibility for web-based host environments. The host needs to retrieve the ESM code (whether inline, from a file, or a URL specified by the widget's backend) and execute it. * **Call Lifecycle Methods:** The `AFM` defines a lifecycle for widgets. The host is responsible for invoking specific methods exported by the `AFM` at the appropriate times.5 The two primary lifecycle methods are: * `initialize({ model })`: Called once per widget instance when it's first created. Its purpose is to allow the widget to set up non-view-specific state or event handlers associated with the `model`. * `render({ model, el })`: Called each time a view of the widget needs to be displayed (potentially multiple times for the same widget instance if it appears in different outputs). This function is responsible for rendering the widget's UI into the provided `el` DOM element and setting up view-specific logic. Both methods can optionally return a cleanup function, which the host must call when the widget instance (for `initialize`) or the specific view (for `render`) is destroyed.10 * **Provide Dependencies:** When invoking the lifecycle methods, the host must supply the necessary dependencies as arguments5: * `model`: An object that implements the `AFM` model interface (detailed below). This object acts as the proxy for communication with the backend. * `el`: An HTML DOM element provided by the host, serving as the container into which the `render` method should inject the widget's UI. ### **3.3. The Critical model Interface** The `model` object passed by the host to the `AFM`'s lifecycle methods is the cornerstone of frontend-backend interaction.10 It provides a standardized API for bidirectional communication. * **Purpose:** The model interface acts as the abstraction layer between the widget's frontend JavaScript and the host's backend system (e.g., the Python kernel in Jupyter, or custom logic in a `FastHTML` host). * **Methods Breakdown:** The `AFM` specification defines a minimal set of methods that the host's model object must implement10: * `get(key: string): any`: Retrieves the current value of a synchronized state property (key) from the backend model. * `set(key: string, value: any): void`: Informs the backend that the frontend intends to change the value of a synchronized state property (key) to value. This might not immediately update the backend state; `save_changes` is often needed. * `on(eventName: string, callback: Function): void`: Subscribes the frontend callback function to specific events from the backend. Key events include `change:` (triggered when a synchronized property changes on the backend) and `msg:custom` (triggered when the backend sends a custom message). * `off(eventName?: string | null, callback?: Function | null): void`: Unsubscribes a previously registered callback. * `save_changes(): void`: Signals to the backend that any pending changes initiated by `set` should be processed and persisted. This is crucial for ensuring frontend interactions update the Python state. * `send(content: any, callbacks?: any, buffers?: ArrayBuffer | ArrayBufferView): void`: Allows the frontend to send arbitrary custom messages (potentially including binary buffers) to the backend for processing. * **Minimalism:** This interface is intentionally designed to be simpler and require fewer methods than the full `ipywidgets.Widget` model API (which is based on `Backbone.js`).10 This simplification significantly lowers the implementation burden for new host platforms aiming for `AFM` compatibility. This decoupling, inherent in the `AFM` specification, enables the feasibility of a custom `FastHTML` host. `AFM` defines *what* the host must provide (load ESM, call lifecycle methods, implement the model interface, provide `el`) 10 but refrains from dictating *how* the host achieves this (e.g., the specific communication protocol or state management library used internally). This separation allows diverse host environments—Jupyter, `Marimo`, `Panel`, and potentially `FastHTML`—to utilize the *same* `AFM` frontend code by providing their own backend implementations that conform to the specified contract.6 Consequently, the challenge for creating a `FastHTML` host shifts from adhering to Jupyter-specific protocols to implementing these defined host responsibilities using `FastHTML`'s architectural components, such as `ASGI`, `WebSockets`, and Python logic. ## **4. Case Study: Marimo as a Native AFM Host** `Marimo` serves as a compelling case study, demonstrating that native `AFM` hosting is achievable outside the traditional Jupyter ecosystem. ### **4.1. Marimo's Architecture** `Marimo` is a reactive Python notebook environment.32 Unlike traditional notebooks where execution order is linear and managed manually, `Marimo` analyzes code dependencies. When a cell is executed or a UI element is interacted with, `Marimo` automatically re-runs only the dependent cells, ensuring consistency between code and outputs.32 Notebooks are stored as standard Python `.py` files, facilitating version control and execution as scripts.32 ### **4.2. Evidence of Native AFM Support** Multiple sources confirm that `Marimo` provides native support for the `AFM` specification and has adopted it as the standard mechanism for integrating third-party UI plugins.6 This means `anywidget` widgets can be used directly within `Marimo` notebooks, often wrapped using `marimo.ui.anywidget(...)` or `mo.anywidget(...)`.28 Examples include widgets like `drawdata` and `quak` being used within `Marimo`.28 Plotly's `FigureWidget` has also been updated to use `anywidget` internally, enabling its use in `Marimo`.44 ### **4.3. Marimo's model Implementation** A critical aspect of `Marimo`'s native support is its implementation of the `AFM` model interface. Documentation explicitly states that `Marimo`'s implementation achieves this *without relying on third-party dependencies* like Jupyter's patched version of `BackboneJS`, which underpins the standard `ipywidgets` model.10 This demonstrates that the `AFM` model contract can be fulfilled using custom logic tailored to the host environment, without inheriting the complexities of the `ipywidgets` stack. ### **4.4. Communication** `Marimo` utilizes `WebSockets` for the communication channel between its frontend (running in the browser) and its backend (the Python process executing the notebook code).45 This channel presumably carries the messages required for `AFM` model interactions (get/set state, send/receive messages) alongside `Marimo`'s own operational messages. However, user reports and issue discussions indicate potential challenges with this approach, including `WebSocket` connection stability issues (e.g., timeouts in cloud deployments 47, connections closing when browser tabs are inactive 48), and difficulties with certain widget functionalities like transferring binary data 49 or achieving fine-grained reactivity based on specific `traitlet` changes.33 Some widgets that work in Jupyter may fail to render or update correctly in `Marimo`, suggesting nuances in the implementation or compatibility layer.49 ### **4.5. Lessons for FastHTML Host** * **Feasibility:** `Marimo`'s existence definitively proves that creating a native `AFM` host environment, independent of the Jupyter kernel and frontend extensions, is technically feasible. * **Minimalism:** `Marimo`'s approach to implementing the model interface without heavy dependencies like `BackboneJS` or potentially even `traitlets` for the core synchronization logic 10 provides a strong precedent for a minimal `FastHTML` host. It validates the idea that the `AFM` contract can be met using lean, custom implementations. * **WebSocket Viability:** `Marimo`'s reliance on `WebSockets` for its primary communication reinforces the choice of `WebSockets` as the most suitable transport layer for implementing the `AFM` model interactions in a custom host like `FastHTML`. * **Potential Challenges:** The issues reported by `Marimo` users concerning `WebSocket` stability, binary data transfer, and reactivity granularity 33 serve as cautionary examples. Implementing robust state synchronization and communication over `WebSockets`, while avoiding the Jupyter stack, introduces its own set of complexities that must be carefully addressed in the `FastHTML` host design. `Marimo`'s native `AFM` support appears well-integrated with its inherent reactivity. When a widget's frontend invokes `model.set()` and `model.save_changes()`, `Marimo`'s backend can presumably update its internal state and trigger the reactive execution of dependent cells, naturally propagating the change.32 `FastHTML`, operating on a different interaction model primarily driven by `HTMX` and server-rendered partials 15, lacks this built-in reactivity graph. Consequently, a `FastHTML` host requires an explicit mechanism to manage state updates originating from widgets and propagate their effects. This likely involves handling widget state changes received via `WebSocket` on the server, updating the corresponding Python object state, and potentially triggering subsequent actions, such as initiating `HTMX` swaps to update other parts of the UI if necessary.33 ## **5. FastHTML Framework Analysis** To design an anywidget host using FastHTML, a clear understanding of FastHTML's architecture and philosophy is essential. ### **5.1. Core Philosophy and Architecture** * **Python-Centric:** FastHTML's fundamental premise is to enable web application development primarily within Python, significantly reducing or even eliminating the need for developers to write separate JavaScript code for frontend logic.15 * **FTags for HTML:** Instead of traditional templating languages (like Jinja), FastHTML uses Python functions and objects, referred to as Fast Tags (FT), to construct HTML documents.15 These FT objects represent HTML elements and their attributes. The fastcore.xml library provides the underlying mechanism for this representation and conversion to HTML strings.51 FastHTML automatically handles the conversion of returned FT objects into HTML responses.19 * **HTMX Integration:** Interactivity in FastHTML applications is primarily achieved through tight integration with the HTMX JavaScript library.15 HTMX allows HTML elements to make HTTP requests (GET, POST, PUT, DELETE, etc.) to the server in response to user events (clicks, form submissions, etc.). The server, running the FastHTML application, processes these requests and typically responds with HTML *partials* (snippets of HTML) rather than full pages. HTMX then intelligently swaps these partials into the designated parts of the existing page's DOM, creating dynamic updates without requiring a full page reload or complex client-side JavaScript frameworks.15 * **ASGI Foundation:** FastHTML is built upon the Asynchronous Server Gateway Interface (ASGI) standard, utilizing the high-performance Starlette toolkit and Uvicorn server.16 This foundation provides inherent support for asynchronous operations and, critically, for WebSocket communication, which is essential for real-time, bidirectional interaction. * **Server-Side Rendering (SSR):** At its core, FastHTML operates on a server-side rendering model. The HTML content, including updates triggered by HTMX, is generated by the Python backend and sent to the client.21 ### **5.2. Suitability Assessment for Hosting anywidget** Assessing FastHTML's suitability as an anywidget host reveals both strengths and challenges: * **Strengths:** * *Python Backend:* The framework's Python-native nature aligns perfectly with the backend component of anywidget widgets, which are defined as Python classes. * *ASGI/WebSocket Support:* The ASGI foundation provides robust, built-in support for WebSockets via Starlette 61, offering the necessary transport mechanism to implement the persistent, bidirectional communication channel required by the AFM model interface.17 * *Minimalism Philosophy:* FastHTML's design goal of simplicity and reduced complexity resonates with the motivation for creating a minimal anywidget host, aiming to avoid the heavier dependencies of traditional web frameworks or the full Jupyter stack.15 * **Challenges/Mismatches:** * *State Management:* The primary architectural mismatch lies in state management. anywidget (via AFM) implies a stateful connection where the model object represents persistent state synchronized between backend and frontend. FastHTML's typical interaction model, mediated by HTMX, is largely stateless from the server's perspective for each request/response cycle. Hosting anywidget requires implementing dedicated state management logic on the server, likely tied to individual WebSocket connections, to maintain widget state across interactions.61 * *JavaScript Integration:* FastHTML generally minimizes JavaScript.25 While it allows vanilla JS 17, integrating anywidget involves more than just including a simple script. It requires loading an external ECMAScript Module (the AFM), executing its lifecycle functions (initialize, render), and establishing communication via the model interface. This differs significantly from typical HTMX patterns where JavaScript's role is often minimal or handled by HTMX itself. * *Rendering Model:* FastHTML generates HTML on the server. anywidget's AFM performs rendering on the *client* side, within a specific DOM element (el) provided by the host. Integrating these requires the FastHTML server to initially render the container element (el), after which the client-side AFM JavaScript takes over rendering the widget's actual content within that container. FastHTML's integration with HTMX for UI updates introduces a specific consideration. While HTMX manages general UI interactivity through discrete HTTP requests resulting in HTML partial responses 15, anywidget necessitates a distinct, persistent WebSocket channel for its state synchronization via the AFM model interface.1 Within a FastHTML application hosting an anywidget, these two communication mechanisms must operate concurrently. Coordination may be required; for instance, a state change within a widget (communicated via WebSocket) might necessitate an update to a non-widget part of the page typically managed by HTMX. The server, receiving the widget update via WebSocket, would need a mechanism to effect this update. This could potentially involve pushing an HTMX event trigger back to the client (e.g., using the HX-Trigger response header 52, although adapting this for WebSocket messages needs investigation) or requiring client-side JavaScript (potentially within the AFM itself or separate glue code) to programmatically initiate an HTMX request based on the WebSocket message. This coordination layer adds complexity to the integration. ## **6. Blueprint: A Minimal anywidget Host in FastHTML** Based on the analysis of `anywidget`, `AFM`, `Marimo`, and `FastHTML`, this section outlines a potential architecture for a minimal `anywidget` host environment built with `FastHTML`. ### **6.1. Proposed Architecture** A viable architecture would consist of the following key components: 1. **FastHTML Application:** The core application built using the `FastHTML` class, handling routing, request processing, and serving HTML/static assets. It leverages the underlying `ASGI` capabilities of `Starlette`/`Uvicorn`. 2. **Widget Rendering Endpoint:** A standard `FastHTML` HTTP route (e.g., defined with `@rt('/render_widget/')`) responsible for generating the initial HTML required to display a widget. This response would include: * An empty placeholder HTML element (e.g., a `Div` created using `FTags`) with a unique ID, which will serve as the `el` container for the `AFM`. * A `