3 ms·
I agree with "evil" being melodromatic of a term. I was just using it for consistency. Bad behavior being eventually codified into a standard because implemen
by Taywee 4y ago
I agree with "evil" being melodromatic of a term. I was just using it for consistency.
Bad behavior being eventually codified into a standard because implementations were lax and it's impossible to go back on what everybody is now already doing is the story behind much of the modern web as it exists. HTML requiring closing tags for some elements, requiring a lack of closing tags for others, and leaving the closing tag still optional for yet others is a side effect of common browser behaviors.
You're right that many implementations with different wrongness smooths out the average in many cases, except when all those implementations are expected to behave the same way on the same bad data. Then they all converge to the same bad behavior, which then becomes the new standard. Perhaps that's organic and natural, but I still wish we had a world where HTML was strictly compatible with XML, or with any other structured and predictable format.