3.5 Redundancy and duplication in code should be avoided -- rewording suggestion

[airbr]

RE Guideline 3.5 Redundancy and duplication in code should be avoided: https://w3c.github.io/sustainableweb-wsg/#redundancy-and-duplication-in-code-should-be-avoided and criterion https://w3c.github.io/sustainableweb-wsg/star.html#WD05-3 .

My suggestion is that we do not need to name a specific methodology in the guideline

Within CSS and JavaScript, use methodologies (like BEM) and systems like DRY and WET to optimize the arrangement and output of your source code.

Could become:

Within CSS and JavaScript, use an organizing methodology and systems like DRY and WET to optimize the arrangement and output of your source code.

Or "use organizing methodologies" alternatively.

This change suggestion was inspired to me from a few observations:

1. It seems more appropriate for the success criterion and as an example rather than given full guideline weight
2. There is some reasonable debate about BEM in some places. I know of variations to BEM, and considerable back and forth discussion about BEM and other methodologies. Even if its featured strongly as an example it might make sense to change the guideline and leave the success criterion as an example with BEM rather than specific guideline to be "like BEM".
3. Per @andreadavanzo - It makes sense to be agnostic to specific methodologies, generally speaking

[AlexDawsonUK]

I disagree strongly with the removal of the other two SC's.

• The SC for removal of unused or dead code is aimed at cleaning out code which is not in use and thereby is safe to remove.
• The SC labeled "Remove Or Simplify" is aimed at optimizing a codebase (so is in use but could be written better to be more efficient; also asks people to consider if features are actually necessary.
• The SC labeled "Iteration Over Recreation" is about how a product is developed and has impacts RE prior to deployment (code creation).

While there may be a relationship between them (which is why they are under the same guideline), they cover very different things and have different impact parameters that need to be addressed.

[andreadavanzo]

Ok. Comment removed

[AlexDawsonUK]

Agreed (RE the changing of the Success Criteria wording).

An update for this has been deployed with the latest pull request.