Creating it is the easy part, IMO. The hard part is to get people to publish on it.
I fear that most authors (and most creators of images and links) are not knowledgeable enough to see the web's shortcomings and that it will be very hard to explain the shortcoming to them -- with the result that most authors will continue to consider their job to be done once they have put their writings (and images and links) on the web.
It already exists and it is called HTML. It is how JS is used to load page contents that can not be tolerated.
Follow progressive enhancement. No JS should be required to load the contents of a page. If JS is included it should be to replace what would otherwise require a full page reload.
If it is not possible to load the contents of a page without JS or the JS fails to complete, then the page should show its alternative contents. The page shall under no case be left blank. This is graceful degradation.
This is advice for a web site owner, and I don't see giving advice to web site owners to be an effective way to help internet users who are very annoyed with the web like I am. Web site owners are embedded in an ecosystem controlled by entities such as Google and Mozilla who either don't know or don't care about the dissatisfaction I and people like me have with the web. I have come to believe that the best way to help internet users who are sufficiently like me is not to try to improve or change the web, but rather to start a new internet service outside of the control of Google, Mozilla, etc. Great grandparent seems to have come to a similar conclusion.
Modern web browsers are designed to satisfy goals X, Y Z, U and W. You are pointing out that browsers can be used to do X. I (along with great grandparent IIUC) are replying, yes, it can, but a new service designed to do X alone will probably do it better with fewer bugs and glitches. And all the web site owners with goals Y, Z, U and W are really getting in our way when we pursue X; our moving to the new service would give us a way to separate ourselves a little from those site owners, saving us a lot of time and annoyance.
I fear that most authors (and most creators of images and links) are not knowledgeable enough to see the web's shortcomings and that it will be very hard to explain the shortcoming to them -- with the result that most authors will continue to consider their job to be done once they have put their writings (and images and links) on the web.