> [Comparing HAS consumption to screen-scraping] That's hyperbole. How does it differ, then? Do you have any code examples? Based on your next statement: If

> [Comparing HAS consumption to screen-scraping] That's hyperbole. How does it differ, then? Do you have any code examples? Based on your next statement: If you're willing to accept clients which are hard-coded to some specific JSON structure, then we can accept clients which are hard-coded to some specific HTML structure it does not differ, but you instead say that both approaches require hard-coded clients to consume programmatically, so they are equivalent. If that were so, then another approach like embedding results in a jpg, would be equally valid since you just have to hard-code your clients to extract information from the jpg. After all the human can parse this so we don't need a bespoke client. From the perspective of theoretical movement of data from a to b, yes of course this is true. But from the perspective of an engineer consuming it, no, they are very different. And the difference is that entropy is proportional to developer pain. I hope you try to be more rational and less ideological about your ideas. I'll leave it at that. I really like thinking about alternative architectures, but this one's appeal seems to rely on ignoring some very real trade-offs.