[fmajid]

It's a compilation of best practices, and valuable as a one-stop-shop and checklist.

[culi]

Sites like these have existed for a long time. I've used this one for years:

https://frontendchecklist.io/rules

I think what sets this specific one apart is its focus on "AI-readiness"

[fmajid]

Apparently it was LLM-generated, so the agent was pleading for itself :-)

https://github.com/jdevalk/specification.website

[nvader]

That's debatable. Every best-practice arose to solve a real problem within a context, and is only "best" if that context applies.

If you apply best-practices without a regard for that context, you end up with a dull, cargo-culted checklist of must-haves to beat people over the head with, without deriving any true human value.

The compiler of this artifact is making a judgement call[0] of what best practices apply somewhat universally (to every "decent website"). I haven't yet been convinced of their standing or judgement to make that decision.

[0]: Charitably, I'm assuming they have, rather than, e.g. delegating the judgement to an opaque model's weights.

[fmajid]

Some requirements have force of law, e.g. complying with GPC in California or Colorado. So do accessibility features in many jurisdictions. Some are just basic decency, like providing alt txt for images.

The approach of marking items as required/recommended/optional addresses your concern. Too bad this specific checklist is LLM-generated.

[fmajid]

Never mind, it’s LLM-generated, not the product of considered thought.

The W3C should really be doing this kind of curation. Or people like those who run caniuse.com.