Ignoring the "AI" implementation details, this generates HTML in the same sense that you can technically convert a rasterized image to an SVG that looks like crap when you zoom in and forces the renderer to draw and fill many unnecessary strokes.
In other words, the output of this does not seem clean enough to hand over to a web dev. They're going to have to rewrite all but the most obvious high level structures that didn't need a fancy tool anyway, and that their snippets plugin in their text editor does a better job of. Much of web dev isn't even visible. Accessibility is all metadata you can't get from a screenshot and responsive CSS would require at least a video exhaustively covering every behavior, animation, etc. The javascript would probably be impossible to determine from any amount of image recognition.
Better off just copying the actual HTML directly from dev tools, no?
In other words, the output of this does not seem clean enough to hand over to a web dev. They're going to have to rewrite all but the most obvious high level structures that didn't need a fancy tool anyway, and that their snippets plugin in their text editor does a better job of. Much of web dev isn't even visible. Accessibility is all metadata you can't get from a screenshot and responsive CSS would require at least a video exhaustively covering every behavior, animation, etc. The javascript would probably be impossible to determine from any amount of image recognition.
Better off just copying the actual HTML directly from dev tools, no?