i strongly support this. to my mind the notion that you can exclusively apply feature detection to the extremely complex browsers is optimistic. there just too many features and special cases to handle.
On 28 Oct, 12:09, jez9999 <jez9...@gmail.com> wrote: > Sorry to reignite this debate in a new thread rather than replying to > the old one, but for some reason Google Groups wouildn't let me reply > to the old one. The suggestion was that the jQuery documentation be > reworded so that $.browser not be called 'Deprecated', but that its > usage perhaps be discouraged. I'd strongly support this rewording, > John et al... could we please see it in the next version of the jQuery > docs? > > I'm not sure I'd even go as far as 'strongly discouraging' the use of > this property; sometimes it's a lot quicker and more convenient to use > it than feature detection, and/or the feature detection just isn't > there. For instance I'm developing a webpage and I happen to know > that IE7 doesn't support the 'before' or 'after' pseudo selectors... I > just want to detect whether this is IE7 and behave accordingly, as I > can leave the other browsers alone and not need to emulate this css in > Javascript. So for this reason I'd really like to see things reworded > as something like 'please try to use $.support, but this can be used > if necessary;. Also I'd like to see that word Deprecated dropped; it > has a particular meaning in programming, which generally implies that > it has been 100% obsoleted by something else and may well be dropped > in a future release. I don't think this applies or should apply to > $.browser, so it should not be called Deprecated. > > Best regards, > Jeremy Morton (Jez) > > On Jul 6, 4:02 pm, John Resig <jere...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > Re-wording the documentation from 'deprecated' to 'strongly discourage > > the use of' (or something similar) might be ok. I'm not sure what else > > we can do on our end - we already link to a number of guides that > > provide good information on the subject matter. > > > As to the linked Stack Overflow discussion - perhaps injecting a rule > > into the stylesheet and then detecting to see if the rule sticks might > > work (not sure, just guessing off-hand). > > > --John > > > On Mon, Jul 6, 2009 at 11:53 AM, Ralph Whitbeck<ralph.whitb...@gmail.com> > > wrote: > > > As of 1.3 $.browseris listed as deprecated in support of jQuery.support. > > > The thinking is that developers should be basing their checks on > > > functionality instead of user agent strings. > > > > I think this is throwing a lot of novice jQuery users as they see the word > > > deprecated and think that they shouldn't use it as the method is going > > > away. From my understanding that method isn't going away. > > > (http://osdir.com/ml/misc/2009-01/msg00001.html"According to John R, > > > $.browserand version will remain in the core indefinitely, despite being > > > deprecated...") For some cases it's really difficult to determine what > > > piece of functionality to use to get the desired result. For instance, > > > today, I noticed a coworker used $.browser.safari to build code specific > > > to > > > a Safari issue we were having. Knowing that $.browserwas listed as > > > deprecated I went to find the correct way to segment out safari using > > > $.support() unfortunately based on the docs I found this to be impossible > > > to > > > easily determine which is the best approach to use and I am still not sure > > > it's possible. > > > > I did some research to see if there was an easy way to segment Safari from > > > the rest using $.support() and found this thread on Stack Overflow that > > > seems to support developer confusion on the issue. > > >http://stackoverflow.com/questions/584285/detecting-ie6-using-jquery-... > > > > Developers want to do the right thing and listing the method as deprecated > > > flags the developer to avoid that method at all costs. I think it would > > > be > > > better to list the method as not a "best practice" instead of deprecated > > > and > > > explain why functionality checks are better then user agent sniffing. > > > > Also it would be good to flush out some scenarios for developers to use > > > which functionality test for certain browsers and certain scenarios. > > > > Thoughts? Am I off base on this? > > > > Ralph --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "jQuery Development" group. To post to this group, send email to jquery-dev@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to jquery-dev+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/jquery-dev?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
