We need a new generation of SSGs that use custom elements, and are easier to learn, with reduced complexity and simpler installation.

Agreed on the "new generation of SSGs"; disagree on the approach that relies on custom elements.

Having written tons of XUL and XBL (the forebears to Web components), I think they're great for their use case, but documents on the Web are a different use case. Documents (like this one) should still be documents—not late-bound portholes plugged by the browser. To really explore this space, XSL (or something like it in spirit) is still a better way to achieve the effect desired (even if XSL itself is gnarly and unattractive).

Hypothesis is unable to cope with annotating this page, for example, because as far is it's concerned, there is no content on it.

Build steps aren't all bad. Most of what the industry has produced in the way of tooling for the "frontend", and the threshold of acceptability those in the industry have tacitly established by use of workflows that incorporate that tooling, on the other hand, is fails to satisfy reasonable expectations.

Food for thought: consider a website that employs a static site generator that itself lives as just another piece of content available on the site—only meant primarily for the reference needs of those authoring the site content, rather than the public at large. I.e., the website as a true dynamic knowledge repository for the associated organization, and one such piece within that repository being an active paper documenting/describing how the site is put together—to such a degree of rigor that the processes and procedures described in the paper can be performed by machine, rather than needing to be carried out by a human operator.

The sidebar cuts off the page content here:

Using a half-width (1080p / 2) window in Firefox.

Change to lowercase in the source and style with caps using CSS?

Some questions non-technical (and even technical) people might ask:

• why am I signing up for so many services?
• can't a just "deploy" my site on GitHub?
• if I use a non-GitHub platform to deploy, do I really need a GitHub account? couldn't I just deploy from a folder on my computer?

Too much duplication between this line and the "Give a website title" heading.

How about, "Give some details", and, "Fill out some details about your website, including its title, a description, etc"?

The font size here is almost illegible tiny on my screen in combination with the other style applied.

This is pretty jarring! I know it's supposed to be cute. It should be noted, though, that the button that appears inline here is not styled the same as the ones below.

If the style were fixed, and there were a click handler added here that scrolled down and highlighted buttons in question, then the gimmick might prove useful.

These links appear to point to fragments for non-existent IDs.

The image here is blown up (oversized to take up too much space, and the jagged pixelated edges are showing).

The hover effect on these menuitems puts them in light grey on a white background--very low contrast.

The tooltip here is cut off at the top and on the left. (Using Firefox.)

The GitHub link in the top bar points to the wrong URL. It should be https://github.com/yaxdotcom/stackless-community.

On the Yax landing page right now, the steps are labelled in Chinese: