I'd rather encourage promising "dreams" than have a web with only 2.5 usable browser engines.
He is doing this for fun and to be creative, is incredibly inspiring for a lot of people, and actually gets things done on top.
The epitome of a hacker, I want to be more like him.
So he is in a good position to decide on the approach and has proven he can finish things. I’d just trust him on this, if my opinion was even relevant.
But as it’s a for fun project, he can write a browser in Fortran and abandon it half-way ;-)
Maybe Ladybird is not usable right away, so what? It's getting impressively close to this point with barely 5 years of development, from scratch (and it goes much deeper than HTML, CSS and JS engine, they also re-implemented the whole networking stack, image/audio/video codecs, font...) and by a small team of mostly volunteers, but more importantly, it's a positive project not only for the developers, but also for their audience and for greater scale web standardization.
I hardly imagine a project such as the one you're describing getting as much traction as Ladybird / SerenityOS (in fact, there are many such of these, but I don't see nearly as much talk and interest for their development), the whole project isn't about the end product, it's explicitly about the process to get there.
Realising dreams is called progress.
The reason Chrome and Firefox exist is because people dreamt of having something better than the already "usable" Internet Explorer.