Google.com loves w3schools. Top search result for every DHTML query.

That's one reason you don't search for "DHTML."

DHTML is a category, not a single search term.

I don't think I've heard someone use the term DHTML since the 90s. I don't expect you will get a lot of resources on it.

Is the content of w3schools actually bad?

Its layout is reasonable, and it seems to have a fairly comprehensive coverage of the topic. Its not overwhelming like w3.org. I can find what I want to know with relative ease (unlike w3.org)

I have seen a couple of articles pointing out that their implementation details are bad, but I don't think I have ever gone on there with the intention of clicking "view source"

w3schools isn't an alternative to w3.org. MDN (developers.mozilla.org) is. And so is webplatform.org.

w3.org is the W3C, the actual organisation that publishes the CSS and XML specs (and the versioned snapshots of the HTML spec).

It used to be a goddawful cesspool of misinformation and poor advice. Thus, http://www.w3fools.com/. It's gotten better, but you're better off with MDN.

No, it's not bad. Hating on w3schools is like hating on PHP: a way for a person to socially signal that they are a Real Developer, not some noob.

w3schools is fine for students just starting out. Though I'd direct them to the MSN articles (but I'm guessing Google can't)

You mean MDN?

Sorry yes, Mozilla Developer Network.