← index
output
pdf · png
stylesheet
screen, forced on
text
selectable
annotations
from the markup
language
javascript
licence
gpl-3.0
last commit
2026-08-13

Promotional review in pharma grew up around documents, and its working assumptions still reflect that. A reviewer expects a fixed artefact that can be marked up, versioned, approved, and produced years later if a regulator asks what was in market on a particular date. A website meets almost none of those assumptions. It reflows to whatever viewport it lands in, loads content as the reader scrolls, assembles some of its copy at render time from services that were never part of the review, and depends for its meaning on pages one click away that the reviewer may never open.

The usual workarounds each give something up. Print-to-PDF applies the print stylesheet, so the committee approves a rendering no patient will ever be shown. A capture of the visible window pushes the rest of the page into a second and third image with no assurance the seams line up. Neither records which text is fixed approved copy and which is generated per visitor, so that distinction gets reconstructed over email and is gone by the time anyone opens the file again.

Screenie produces one file holding the page and its context together: the full rendered page at a fixed width with the screen stylesheet forced on, an appended index of every link and its destination, and a table of notes the page’s own authors attached to specific elements. Because those notes live in the markup as data attributes rather than in a reviewer’s separate document, they travel with the page — anyone who captures it gets the same annotations, and they stay attached as the content changes.

Two limits are worth stating plainly. A capture records one rendering, so for content that varies by visitor, geography or plan it shows the variant the capturing browser received — which is exactly why the dynamic-content annotations exist, since an author can describe the range even though a single capture cannot show it. And the artefact is not an approval. It improves the material a reviewer works from; the judgment about whether the page may run stays entirely with the committee.

a demonstration page, captured and annotated
a demonstration page, captured and annotated
the annotation tables appended to the capture
the annotation tables appended to the capture