[Eyas]

Was I the only one that found `docs.fastht.ml/llms.txt` more useful than both fastht.ml and docs.fastht.ml?

Zooming out, it's interesting how many (especially dev-focused) tools & frameworks have landing sites that are so incomprehensible to me. They look like marketing sites but don't even explain what the thing they're offering does. llms.txt almost sounds like a forcing function for someone to write something that is not just more suitable for LLMs, but humans.

This ties in to what others are saying: a good enough LLM should understand a resource that a human can understand, ideally. But also, maybe we should make the main resources more understandable to humans?

[tpoacher]

This! I would be in favour of this proposal, if only simply so that I can make the llms.txt file my next point of call for actual information when the human-facing page sucks.

[nine_k]

"We cannot make the marketing department accept a design that is simple and easy to comprehend, because it's not flashy and fashionable enough. So we sneak it in as an alternative content for machines."