I really don't get these arguments. I guess I'm too selfish. I look at it like this: Does this new lore cost me anything? Is it going to make me do any more work or impact my game? No, it isn't. A player who wants to use these rules is free to do so and it's his or her character. They can fill their boots and good on them.
Which brings me to the second question - does it make other people happy? Yup, apparently it does. So, since it costs me nothing and makes other folks happy, what's the problem here? The mechanics are such that any world builder can easily ignore it - it is a rare trait after all. It doesn't cost you a single thing to add this to the game. And it makes other folks happy. What's in it for me to oppose that? What am I gaining? Or, better yet, what are you gaining by opposing this?
[MENTION=58172]Yaarel[/MENTION] talks quite extensively about the change in elven lore. Thing is, it's not really a change. 1e limited elves to 12th level magic users. Until 3e, elves were NEVER the greatest wizards in the game. In 3e, baseline elves didn't gain an Int or Cha bonus at all, so, nope, other than some campaign specific variants, elves were not the greatest wizards in the game. It wasn't until 4e with Eladrin that the lore and the mechanics actually matched - eladrin wizards were among the best in the game. But, we don't HAVE eladrin in 5e. Not in core anyway. Core 5e elves fit best with 1e to 3e elves. So, his entire complaint ignores what's actually written in the game.
So, I'll ask again, what is the cost to you to have this in the game?