I support this as well. On 2009-10-28, at 3:15 PM, Nathan Bubna wrote:
> ditto. > > On Wed, Oct 28, 2009 at 8:00 AM, weepy <jonah...@gmail.com> wrote: >> >> 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 >> -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~--- >> >> > > -- > > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google > Groups "jQuery Development" group. > To post to this group, send email to jquery-...@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 > . > > -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "jQuery Development" group. To post to this group, send email to jquery-...@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.
