4 ms·

Cool, thanks for the reply. For me making components is the hard work, anything that helps automate organizing / naming / and synchronizing a component library

Cool, thanks for the reply. For me making components is the hard work, anything that helps automate organizing / naming / and synchronizing a component library with sketch sounds intriguing to me. Is the output intended to be code-edited by a developer to add hrefs, interactivity? Is it intended to generate pseudo components for later finessing or is it intended to produce the final outcome of a site directly from sketch (making Sketch the new dreamweaver?)

johndamaia 7y ago
It's intended to be code-edited by a developer. The goal is to have an advance starting point. You'll start with "everything" ready to work on the fun stuff. If you curious enough to see the output I'm happy to share the code from our demo. If it makes sense drop me a line at john [@] zecoda.com
- aznumeric 7y ago
  Hi. I would like to have an option of using just the automated part of the service and do the developer part myself. If hypothetically you would include that option, how cheaper do you think it wold be compared to the current price ? Also one more option: convert design to just HTML and CSS, without javascript or framework of any kind. Would that make sense ?
  - johndamaia 7y ago
    Interesting feedback. Our main goal is to ditch the human verification, we want to be confident enough to provide great code automatically. Not there yet. Regarding the output, it's great to know your thoughts on the frameworks. We actually went for a framework to make it simple for our users. In the future we want to allow our users to chose what output they want. So, it makes total sense.
    - aznumeric 7y ago
      Sounds good. Regarding the no-framework output, I'm not against frameworks, I was just thinking for a moment from the perspective of a more traditional web designer who only incorporates bits of pre-made JS code in their design. Such a person might not even know what Vue.js is but may still greatly benefit from your service if it allowed them to convert their designs to just html/css.
- nomy99 7y ago
  how is this different than working with a really good starter kit? I guess if you already have sketch designs this will give you a better starting point.

johndamaia 7y ago

It's intended to be code-edited by a developer. The goal is to have an advance starting point. You'll start with "everything" ready to work on the fun stuff. If you curious enough to see the output I'm happy to share the code from our demo. If it makes sense drop me a line at john [@] zecoda.com

aznumeric 7y ago
Hi. I would like to have an option of using just the automated part of the service and do the developer part myself. If hypothetically you would include that option, how cheaper do you think it wold be compared to the current price ? Also one more option: convert design to just HTML and CSS, without javascript or framework of any kind. Would that make sense ?
- johndamaia 7y ago
  Interesting feedback. Our main goal is to ditch the human verification, we want to be confident enough to provide great code automatically. Not there yet. Regarding the output, it's great to know your thoughts on the frameworks. We actually went for a framework to make it simple for our users. In the future we want to allow our users to chose what output they want. So, it makes total sense.
  - aznumeric 7y ago
    Sounds good. Regarding the no-framework output, I'm not against frameworks, I was just thinking for a moment from the perspective of a more traditional web designer who only incorporates bits of pre-made JS code in their design. Such a person might not even know what Vue.js is but may still greatly benefit from your service if it allowed them to convert their designs to just html/css.
nomy99 7y ago
how is this different than working with a really good starter kit? I guess if you already have sketch designs this will give you a better starting point.