[1] https://digiday.com/media/new-york-times-enlisting-interacti...
[1] https://digiday.com/media/new-york-times-enlisting-interacti...
That in itself is okay, it's just that you don't realize it's broken unless you open the full article and look for interactive bits.
If the content breaks all of their parsers and scrapers because it's tied up in these custom dynamic components, then I wouldn't really expect all of the parsers to handle that themselves. (Of course one pure text standard would be nice.)
The bigger issue to me is that the omissions are silent.
I would argue it is squarely the other way around.
I already knew he worked for NYT, but still: I wonder how much it matters that the creator of Coffeescript was second author on this article.
Just give the the motherlovin' text.
Side note: NYTimes formats tables in nonstandard ways that break both Firefox Reader Mode and Pocket (these use the same parser AFAIU). That's annoying. Standards exist for reasons.