Full independence seems inprobable, or at least I cannot imagine anyone adding support for all the external types: https://orgmode.org/manual/External-Links.html. IMO Org is a markup language imersed into Emacs, and there is nothing wrong with that.
I also think the syntax is just very nice to work with and I prefer it over markdown, so having more options to use it is certainly good.
It is one of the reasons I love emacs so much: there is so little interface in the way of doing what you want to do. If you like you can compile, debug, use lsp, read rss, manage your agenda, do any damn thing you want- but at its core emacs is just an extremely capable text editor that enables you to do your thing.
Good to see Swiss made software on here. Greetings from Japan!
No, I do not deny that it needs a web server. It also needs no docker. Any old Apache or Nginx would do just as well.
It is not a server that serves pages that can be displayed well on phones as written by GP.
Indeed, I doubt it that anyone would try to cram handling of very different types, protocols and workflows into one app—other than Emacs, of course. Especially on a phone.
These days, custom protocols are a standard way to call external applications via links. So instead of sticking to Org's standard protocols, one could use those that are handled by applications that the person uses, particularly on a phone. It's actually possible to create handlers for Org's protocols, even on phones, and redirect the links to apps—but it's likely easier instead to use available protocols on phones and override them in Org or generally on the desktop, redirecting to modes and apps there.
Also, variations of the ‘share’ functionality are used nowadays when there's more content than a one-line link—and similarly, with some fiddling it's possible to define custom handlers and workflows for that. Personally I'm using the Automate app on Android.