My concern here is that by gravitating to HTML you lose the ability for a human (you!) to easily co-author the document with the LLM. If it’s just an explainer for your consumption, that’s not a concern - but if it’s a spec sheet for something more complex, I deeply value being able to dive in and edit what is produced for me. With a HTML doc it is much harder to do that than with MD. Now of course you could just rep…
Using Claude Code: The unreasonable effectiveness of HTML
221–230 of 308 posts
Re: Using Claude Code: The unreasonable effectiveness of HTML
#222Re: Using Claude Code: The unreasonable effectiveness of HTML
#223My concern here is that by gravitating to HTML you lose the ability for a human (you!) to easily co-author the document with the LLM. If it’s just an explainer for your consumption, that’s not a concern - but if it’s a spec sheet for something more complex, I deeply value being able to dive in and edit what is produced for me. With a HTML doc it is much harder to do that than with MD. Now of course you could just rep…
Re: Using Claude Code: The unreasonable effectiveness of HTML
#224Re: Using Claude Code: The unreasonable effectiveness of HTML
#225My concern here is that by gravitating to HTML you lose the ability for a human (you!) to easily co-author the document with the LLM. If it’s just an explainer for your consumption, that’s not a concern - but if it’s a spec sheet for something more complex, I deeply value being able to dive in and edit what is produced for me. With a HTML doc it is much harder to do that than with MD. Now of course you could just rep…
We have been authoring HTML by hand for decades with ease. Text editors are very good at it, and many have commands to auto-wrap, auto-close etc. Reading and writing is simple.
Re: Using Claude Code: The unreasonable effectiveness of HTML
#226I don't have any issue with markdown though - but terminal isn't a place to review it and leave useful feedback. Use one of the many tools that are popping up or build your own (like I did) to leave comments and iterate.
Re: Using Claude Code: The unreasonable effectiveness of HTML
#227My concern here is that by gravitating to HTML you lose the ability for a human (you!) to easily co-author the document with the LLM. If it’s just an explainer for your consumption, that’s not a concern - but if it’s a spec sheet for something more complex, I deeply value being able to dive in and edit what is produced for me. With a HTML doc it is much harder to do that than with MD. Now of course you could just rep…
overall i'm seeing a potential here for more human authoring, as you can really multiply the surface of your inputs with deterministic widgets rather than just delegating.
Re: Using Claude Code: The unreasonable effectiveness of HTML
#228Re: Using Claude Code: The unreasonable effectiveness of HTML
#229Markdown is a lightweight document format that leans toward easy writing, reading, and sharing. It is much simpler than HTML, easier to edit by hand, and works well for notes, documentation, drafts, README files, and content that may later be converted into HTML, PDF, or other formats.
That's why I'll continue to use Markdown for most of my notes and documentation, while I'll only use HTML for "public facing" documents.
Re: Using Claude Code: The unreasonable effectiveness of HTML
#230Markdown remains great because the other side is just going to use Claude to do their work anyway, and I can use Claude to verify their work meets my specifications.