content/posts/2022-09-11-jqueries.md: commit outstanding writing

1 files changed, 7 insertions, 11 deletions

diff --git a/content/posts/2022-09-11-jqueries.md b/content/posts/2022-09-11-jqueries.md
index 343753a..bb9c776 100644
--- a/content/posts/2022-09-11-jqueries.md
+++ b/content/posts/2022-09-11-jqueries.md
@@ -40,18 +40,14 @@ My personal opinion is a bit more nuanced.  I agree that [jQuery][]
 isn't *strictly necessary* for new web applications and that the modern
 [DOM][] API is usually sufficient.
 
-But [if it ain't broke, don't fix it][fix].  It often takes less effort
-to maintain [jQuery][] in an existing application than it does to remove
-[jQuery][] or replace it with something else.
+[If it ain't broke, don't fix it][fix].  It's often easier to maintain
+[jQuery][] in an existing web application than to remove or replace it.
 
-Also, consistency is important.  Given a team of developers working on
-several applications, relying on consistent dependencies, idioms, and
-formatting between disparate code bases is often more important than
-using the latest technology or the best technique, because the
-consistency reduces the [cognitive load][] for the entire team.
-
-I would prefer using [jQuery][] for new applications this scenario too,
-provided that [jQuery][] and other dependencies are kept up to date.
+Consistency is important for a team of developers working on multiple
+web applications.  Relying on consistent dependencies, idioms, and
+formatting between disparate web applications is often more important
+than using the latest technique or technology, because consistency
+reduces the [cognitive load][] for the entire team.
 
 Even as someone who [cares about page size][shrinkage] and [literally
 measures JavaScript size by byte][js-byte-size], I don't find the