I’ve been writing HTML since the late ‘90s, and while the web has evolved in a hundred different ways, the core of it really hasn’t. You still open a file, structure your markup, style it with CSS, and refine it until it looks and behaves the way you want. The fundamentals are the same. The tags are more semantic, the layouts are more flexible, and the standards are tighter, but at its heart, HTML is still crafted line by line.
What has changed dramatically is the tooling. Editors have ballooned into full development environments, packed with extensions, panels, terminals, and features I’ll never touch. Tools like Visual Studio Code and WebStorm are incredibly powerful, but they’re also heavy. I’ve never felt the need to trade a clean, lightweight workflow for a behemoth that tries to do everything at once. For my projects, I stick with a simple stack that covers writing, version control, and validation. These are the three tools I use on every HTML and CSS project.
Why NoteTab Pro still anchors my HTML workflow
I’ve used NoteTab Pro since I first started programming, and it’s one of the few tools that’s stayed in my workflow the entire time. It has picked up features over the years, but it never turned into something bloated or distracting. It launches instantly, uses barely any resources, and lets me focus on the markup instead of managing extensions, panels, or background services. That consistency matters. I don’t want to relearn my editor every few years. I want it to be predictable.
For the kind of work I do, it fits perfectly. When I’m structuring long-form articles, building clean layouts, or formatting content for a CMS with specific rules, the built-in HTML and CSS libraries make the process fast. I can drop in structured elements quickly, tweak attributes, and move on. The ability to customize snippets is especially valuable when a CMS has quirks or strict formatting requirements. I can adjust my code templates once and reuse them indefinitely.
It’s not trying to manage JavaScript frameworks or act as a full development environment, and that’s the point. I don’t need my editor to build the web for me. I need it to load quickly, let me write clean HTML without friction, and get out of the way so I can finish and publish.
Why GitHub Desktop is my safety net for HTML work
GitHub Desktop is the only modern addition to my stack, and even then, it’s there for one job: version control. It’s a graphical interface for Git that lets you track changes, review edits line by line, create branches, and roll back mistakes without touching the command line. If I want to experiment with a layout tweak or structural change, I can branch it off safely. If something breaks, I can restore a previous version in seconds. That kind of safety net can be priceless when mistakes happen.
It runs alongside NoteTab Pro. I write and save files like I always have. GitHub Desktop simply monitors the project folder. When I reach a logical stopping point, I commit with a short description and move on. I don’t even push most of my HTML projects to GitHub. For my work, local repositories are enough. I’m not using it for collaboration or cloud hosting. I’m using it for version history, rollback, and controlled experimentation. It gives me insurance and structure without changing how I actually build HTML and CSS.
Why online validators keep my HTML and CSS honest
I stick with online validators because they’re simple and frictionless. I don’t need another app running in the background or tightly wired into my editor. When I’m ready to check a page, I paste in a URL or upload a file, review the results, fix what needs fixing, and move on. In my multi-monitor setup, I’ll keep the validator open on one screen and NoteTab Pro on another, working through issues quickly without breaking focus. It keeps validation intentional instead of turning it into constant background noise.
The standards check I trust for HTML
For HTML, I use the W3C Markup Validation Service. It’s a well-known name among developers for a reason. It checks document structure, improper nesting, missing attributes, and standards compliance against modern HTML specs. I like it because it’s direct. It tells me what’s wrong, where it’s wrong, and why it matters. There’s no guesswork. If something’s off structurally, I know immediately.
A straightforward way to validate CSS
For CSS, I rely on the W3C CSS Validator. It does exactly what it says. It flags invalid properties, typos, and rules that don’t conform to the specification. CSS can fail in some cases, so having a standards-based check gives me confidence that I’m not shipping sloppy styles. It’s a quick way to confirm that what I’ve written is clean and technically correct.
When local validation makes sense
If you want to take validation a step further, there’s also the Nu Html Checker, which powers modern HTML validation and the W3C’s current markup checks. It can be run locally, but it requires downloading the tool and running it with Java from the command line. That setup isn’t difficult, but it’s more involved than using the web interface. For my workflow, the online validators are enough. If I ever needed bulk validation or automation, the local Nu checker would be the next step.
Related
Become a Better Programmer: 7 Habits to Grow
Battle-tested habits to write better programs.
Why this simple stack still works for me
I’m not building massive web apps or managing sprawling front-end frameworks. I’m writing and publishing clean, structured HTML and CSS, and for that kind of work, this stack is more than enough. NoteTab Pro gives me speed and predictability. GitHub Desktop gives me structure and rollback. The W3C validators keep everything standards-compliant and technically sound. It’s intentionally minimal, and after years of building for the web, I’ve learned that simple and dependable beats complex and bloated every time.
