HTML - 5 throws out the DTD. What you validate against becomes arbitrary: could be the same tomorrow, but maybe not. A versioned standard does not have this pr

HTML - 5 throws out the DTD. What you validate against becomes arbitrary: could be the same tomorrow, but maybe not. A versioned standard does not have this problem. I realize that the response is: "validation doesn't matter". I disagree. This is not merely about developing to the existing browser ecology. We all do that of necessity. But there has always been a somewhat-pliable boundary with versioned specs that lets you know the state of the ecology that you developed against. That goes out the window with a living document. Many sites, such as HN and Google abandoned the DTD long ago. I do not object to this. However, I would argue that the fact that sites can choose to abandon the DTD is only enabled by the existence of a set of standards to which they choose not to bind themselves. Abandoning a clear target is obviously not a problem today. But I am more concerned with the future: What standard are we choosing NOT to follow? I do not want to return to the chaos of the early web where we developed against browsers instead of standards. Again, I know the objections: We develop against browsers today. No, not really. You develop against browsers that have agreed to a contract of sorts to follow a coherent standard. Thus if you develop to said standard, the work required to make your site work with the current ecology is minimized. Will a "living document" lead us back to the wild west? I am not a prophet, but I am uneasy nevertheless.