+1 for all of the above. I think this is a really important discussion that could have a big impact on Web2py since the Welcome app is used as the scaffolding for creating new Web2py applications.
It reminds me a lot of the primary reason why I decided to risk using Web2py in the first place which amounted to freedom and "universality" Built in multilingual capability and the DAL where exactly the kinds of things that I was looking for because they allowed me to start developing right away without needing to commit to any specific databases and knowing that no matter who I was going to be developing for I could continue to leverage my previous investments. Here a setup that seems very "Web2py" to me and that I think would increase our audience. Universal Default I would propose that we have a "Universal" default that would work on many devices. A default frontend that fulfills any legal aspects of related to accessibility in the US and other countries would be good as well. In this case it sounds like the logical choices for a "Universal" front end framework would be Skeleton (http://www.getskeleton.com) or Foundation (http://foundation.zurb.com) as proposed by Andrew. Specialized Alternatives Offering one or more alternatives that can be "swapped" in gives developers the option of using whatever front-end framework they need or prefer to use. So if we end up using a default of skeleton but I want to use foundation I can swap out Skeleton for Foundation. Disadvantages Requires Web2py developers to agree on and implement a way to achieve this. Advantages Works great out of the box Trivial to implement specialized frontends Makes it easier to choose Web2py
