> Compare Revdoku and Hataw for no-account publishing, link lifetime, same-URL updates, access controls, analytics, and AI-agent compatibility.

# Revdoku vs Hataw

Revdoku and Hataw both publish static files without requiring an account for the first link. Hataw emphasizes disposable, immutable sharing links. Revdoku emphasizes a preview that can become a permanent website and continue changing at the same URL.

This comparison uses the public [Hataw website](https://hataw.dev/) and [Hataw agent documentation](https://hataw.dev/llms.txt), checked on August 14, 2026. Where a capability is not documented, the table says so instead of guessing.

## Quick comparison

| Capability | Revdoku | Hataw |
| --- | --- | --- |
| Publish without an account | One public 24-hour preview | Yes |
| Link lifetime without claiming | 24 hours | 30 days |
| Permanent website | Claim the preview with a free account | Not documented; Hataw describes 30-day links |
| Update the same URL | Yes | No; published links are immutable |
| Password access | Supported | Not documented |
| Email-based access | Require Email access is supported | Not documented |
| Analytics | Not included in the Revdoku free account | View and click tracking is documented for signed-in use |
| Custom domains | One website in the free account | Not documented |
| Agent connection | Local client, AI skill, hosted MCP with OAuth, HTTP API | HTTP publishing API |
| Static hosting | Yes | Yes |

## Choose Revdoku when

- The live URL must survive beyond a temporary review window.
- An AI agent should revise the website without generating a new share link.
- You need Password or Require Email access.
- You want to connect multiple compatible AI clients through hosted MCP.
- The site includes binary assets that a local publishing client can upload.

## Choose Hataw when

- A disposable public link is the intended result.
- A 30-day window is enough.
- Immutability is useful because every new publish should produce a new artifact and URL.
- You want a small HTTP-based publishing flow and do not need same-URL revisions.

## The practical difference

With Hataw, publishing a revised artifact creates another immutable link. With Revdoku, the expected revision path is to update the existing website or republish its bound local folder. That distinction matters for a link already sent to a client, added to a document, or indexed by a search engine.

To test the Revdoku workflow, publish once, save the URL, change one heading, and publish the same folder again. The saved URL should show the revision.

## Bottom line

Choose Hataw for a disposable public artifact with a longer no-account lifetime. Choose Revdoku when the link should become permanent, stay editable, support controlled access, or be managed by several AI clients.

---

[View the canonical page](https://revdoku.com/compare/hataw/) · [Browse llms.txt](https://revdoku.com/llms.txt)