Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Using Claude Code: The unreasonable effectiveness of HTML

twitter.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

121–130 of 308 posts

Re: Using Claude Code: The unreasonable effectiveness of HTML

#121

Post by victorbjorklund »

pbhjpbhj wrote: post #90
pydry wrote: post #73

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>We have been authoring HTML by hand for decades with ease No, we've been generating it with templates or authoring templates. Authoring HTML by hand is a very early 2000s thing to do.

After you a FE webdev that doesn't regularly author HTML by hand?

Hand on heart. When was the last time you built a serious production system for a real business that was 100% built from HTML without using any build step? Just editing the footer and header in every file when it updates (or using iframes)

Re: Using Claude Code: The unreasonable effectiveness of HTML

#122

Post by F7F7F7 »

OJFord wrote: post #78
Jakob wrote: post #34

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

Templated though, not manually writing it out for every blog post say. I think GP means it just has more friction as a writing format than markdown for example.

[flagged]

Re: Using Claude Code: The unreasonable effectiveness of HTML

#123

Post by F7F7F7 »

laurels-marts wrote: post #63
Jakob wrote: post #34

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

You have been authoring HTML by hand for decades. Not every SWE is a FE dev.

I learned HTML 20+ years ago in high school.

I did not go to a front end high school.

Re: Using Claude Code: The unreasonable effectiveness of HTML

#124

Post by throwatdem12311 »

momojo wrote: post #12

When exploring a new idea or tool, my go to prompt is ``` In a single index.html, no dependencies, sparse styling, create an app that ``` Even before AI, it's how I built small tools, and there's something lovely about being able to email my friends the tool, and tell them "If you want to make a change, toss it to your LLM!"

My manager does this and with a straight face comes to me after with it and goes “put this in production” and wonders why it takes more than 5 minutes.

I absolutely hate the absolute rot these tools have caused to people’s brains.

Re: Using Claude Code: The unreasonable effectiveness of HTML

#125

Post by F7F7F7 »

pbhjpbhj wrote: post #90
pydry wrote: post #73

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>We have been authoring HTML by hand for decades with ease No, we've been generating it with templates or authoring templates. Authoring HTML by hand is a very early 2000s thing to do.

After you a FE webdev that doesn't regularly author HTML by hand?

Can’t answer the person who responded to you but:

Yesterday. Astro components.

3 million people will have seen it as I type this. More next week.

Re: Using Claude Code: The unreasonable effectiveness of HTML

#126

Post by F7F7F7 »

manmal wrote: post #61
tmhrtly wrote: post #21

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…

Yes that’s the case. And as Anthropic staff, author has an incentive to promote workflows that require an agent to interact with text documents.

HTML is by far simpler than Markdown.

Re: Using Claude Code: The unreasonable effectiveness of HTML

#127

Post by 40four »

This article is bringing up a point that I’ve thought about for a long time, even outside of the context of LLMs. It’s very surprising to me HTML never caught on more just as a common document for sharing information outside of a website/ web server. Just something to pass around like we do Word or Excel documents.

Re: Using Claude Code: The unreasonable effectiveness of HTML

#128

Post by F7F7F7 »

johndreic wrote: post #109

HTML+Tailwind is the only format where "looks roughly correct" and "is structurally correct" have the same probability. Every other output format needs a renderer to find out which one you got.

HTML and hand written CSS mind as well be legally binding.

Re: Using Claude Code: The unreasonable effectiveness of HTML

#129

Post by albedoa »

jason1cho wrote: post #27
weird-eye-issue wrote: post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Are you just trying to pretend that Markdown is as rich as HTML and that all the use cases that they described are possible with Markdown?

Markdown was a hype in late 2010s that has cooled down due to chatbots. In turn, chatbots pump up markdown by making it the default output format.

> has cooled down due to chatbots.

What in the world.

Re: Using Claude Code: The unreasonable effectiveness of HTML

#130

Post by OJFord »

F7F7F7 wrote: post #122
OJFord wrote: post #78

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Templated though, not manually writing it out for every blog post say. I think GP means it just has more friction as a writing format than markdown for example.

[flagged]

Well if you're going to be like that you may as well say something about assembly, butterflies, and what the hell's a web log anyway, spiders and beavers have nothing to do with one another.

'we have been authoring' is present perfect continuous. Going forwards, and for at least the last two 'decades', HTML blog posts can use CMSs.

Post reply on HN