Sorry, maybe I misunderstood or misread the article. The source article makes this claim: > It “makes” “the” “html” “that” “is” “already” “cluttered” “enough”

Sorry, maybe I misunderstood or misread the article. The source article makes this claim: > It “makes” “the” “html” “that” “is” “already” “cluttered” “enough” “even” “less” “readable”. So other than 'makes the html less readable', the other content of the article is "I was devastated to have to update my src" back in 2000, and "by the way, run your html through a validator, see lots of stuff isn't valid!" Because of the lack of content and compelling argument in the 'article', I feel like my assertion that it wasn't useless was just as substantive as "I don't like it" that the article proposed. I wouldn't have much to add that the original author didn't already say with this sentence: > I write <div class="multiple words"> if I have to in HTML