Let's keep XD as design based software. Maybe try adding something to your Markup to make the syntax less of a pain to write? For example you could potentially bolt on Shopify's Liquid or handlebars.js to segregate and loop over various portions of your Markup maybe?

Thiers also things like HAML and I bet your already using Emmet.

SO many options on the dev side of the fence to speed up your HTML writing that asking our design software seems a little lazy.

PS. It also agitates the 'refuse to code designers' who come out running and screaming with pitchfork and fire in hand for this type of thing :)

We've setup a beta program for our XD to HTML page builder, you can sign up here now: https://builder.magicul.io/xd-to-html

I want to say that there should be a feature that should export the webpage directly into adobe.

FIX THIS AND MAKE IT HAPPEN!!! CHANGE THE FREAKING WORD!!!! NO MORE JERK OFF PROGRAMMERRRZZZZ

For those who insist XD is a protyping tool, why should it be limited to just that function? Why do you need to reinvent the wheel and have to recreate the entire project in another application?

I don't know that this idea is really appropriate for the software. XD is a prototyping tool, not a DIY website builder. Adding in this functionality would likely take resources away from improving aspects of the core functionality that involve allowing designers to easily and intuitively design and prototype, build out functional design systems, and seamlessly hand off to developers.

I think if a component is named 'button-primary' it should be exported as '<button class=primary><button>' instead of 'div'

More importantly, we should have the option to pick between ABSOLUTE Export or RESPONSIVE Export...because as has been proven by developer plugins export plugins are USELESS if they give pixel placement of elements. I suggest using only RELATIVE units.

Adobe XD needs to be able to export to HTML. Otherwise, it stands among Adobe CC apps as the only one that can't create a finished product. If I'm going to create a prototype for a web page, I may as well just use Photoshop. If you know Photoshop, it's not hard to design a prototype for a web page, quickly. With Muse gone, Adobe XD needs to find a way to export to HTML. It's okay if the HTML isn't perfect wysiwyg, but something, even if basic.

Developers are in this world for something guys, designers will not replace web devs. Just accept that Xd would be a wonderful tool if designing and prototyping tools are exhaustives and reliable. ^^
Indeed, as someone said just below, it would be pretty to export Xd artboards to kinda interactive format to enjoy auto-animation !

Xd is a pretty good prototype designer, but I can see A LOT of potential as a Presentation Designer. Instead of creating crappy powerpoints or making fully animated motion graphic videos, I can have the best of both worlds with Xd. BUT ONLY IF I CAN EXPORT OUT A FILE THAT CAN BE DELIVERED TO A CLIENT. I don't know if that is an HTML site, a fully interactive PDF, or something else. Adobe should implement this feature as soon as possible. I want to use this app for high-end interactive presentations but the lack of an export feature makes it useless for client work.

This feature request has been under review since 2016 where they asked - How would you expect this to work?

Four years and 3,070 votes on that post later, Adobe doesn't seem to have an answer. Muse support has ended. No new Dreamweaver tutorials or content posted for years. It gives me the sense that Adobe has no will to develop or support tools or applications for website development.

Prototyping with XD is a case of fashion above function. The shoe you've designed looks good, but with Adobe, you don't have the tools to get it into production and make it a reality.

It would be awesome if I could reuse the (final) XD prototype to create the actual website (with HTML and CSS) from it! Like it is possible with https://webflow.com/ (create HTML and CSS with a visual UI)

okay, so i just spent the past two weeks designing the perfect website for my project and now i found out it can't be done? i need a website published in one month, so there's no time to learn how to code it from scratch, and our budget can't afford a developer... guess i'll be back on those wix builder thingys. basically i announced a 3 course-meal and instead i'm serving pb&j fml

@anonym, obviously you didn´t get the purpose of XD.

I am a web developer with 20+ years experience. I don't do design work professionally, I write HTML, CSS and JS , on a daily basis, and integrate that into several different backend systems built in different backend languages (node, PHP, CF).

I have been using PS for decades to create mockups, and I am very fluent in PS, and I have recently tried to jump on the XD bandwagon.

I brought over a simple PSD into XD, and none of the text was formatted correctly with line height all over the place. The background layers were all wider than the artboard and so many layers were overlapping other layers. Every smart object was brought in as SVG, and I could go on, but these are the underlying reasons why this "tool" cannot and should not ever export anything made in it to any form of HTML and CSS.

The potential to do so much bad is too easy. If you wanted to force it to create an export, then you would need to drastically overhaul the way it creates layers and groups layers. You would need to add some form of DOM viewer in order to make sure that the "layers" are stacking correctly in the markup, and not just dropping in wherever. Ensure proper markup and responsive functionality, a way to add breakpoints when they are needed and not a fixed css framework like bootstrap et all.

I think the better approach, rather then force this nightmare of a design tool to do even more work and do it badly, is to simply allow import from XD to DW, and let DW figure out how it needs to be fixed. I have not used DW in about 12 years, as now I hand code everything, but I remember Paul Tranni showcasing some kind of PSD to DW workflow back in the day a few years ago, with some weird breakpoint tool.

Anyway the point is this is not the tool you want to use for design -> website workflow. this project should be scrapped really, as I still have to use PS and/or AI to create the assets I need so I can then import them into XD... why is that a thing... who thought that was a good idea? "I know what we need, another design tool so we can just make assets in PS and AI, and then import them into this new tool to display them!"... "Can't we do that already in PS and AI?" "Sure, but we need to up the price for CC, and this is a perfect justification for it; only this tool will be of lower quality and be harder to work with!" Thumbs up all around I guess.

To make XD more robust and a fully functional product, it must be able to export to a fully functional site. Otherwise its a whitewash.

If it possible for Adobe with XD to have a botton JUST ONE click you export my web design direct as a live website (html language) and it will save on Adobe server with monthley amount, let say: (15 $) to keep my website design which I did a live.

Because as me as a graphic designer I love XD because it shows me as "InDesign as example" what I do, so it will be better when I design a website to a client and he need it to be normal online web site for him. So if its OK for adobe to creat a botton, just click the program will translated into html or CSS.

Hope this happen. Thnaks Adobe you have a great programs, and am use it since versin 1 from InDesign or Photoshop, Illustrator too.

It has to be responsive site with a complete underlying code

Another way this could help is if you are able to port a design directly with Portfolio, perhaps by generating a new template from it and pasting the layout where it needs to be. I'm new to this product, new to Portfolio, but I abandoned a year sub with Wix once I realized the CC comes with these tools already. I understand there's a lot of complex trickery that must come with converting a fluid creative tool like xD to HTML. Appreciate your work on this product. Thanks!