StackOverflow2013

Note that there are some explanatory texts on larger screens.

plurals

PO
primarykey
Id
1294859
data
AcceptedAnswerId
0
AnswerCount
0
ClosedDate
CommentCount
2
CommunityOwnedDate
CreationDate
2009-08-18T16:04:51.973
FavoriteCount
0
LastActivityDate
2009-08-18T16:53:04.137
LastEditDate
2009-08-18T16:53:04.137
LastEditorUserId
45433
OwnerUserId
45433
ParentId
1294586
PostTypeId
2
Score
26
ViewCount
0
LastEditorDisplayName
text
Body
It seems to me browser detection has been widely frowned upon since <a href="http://ejohn.org/blog/future-proofing-javascript-libraries/" rel="noreferrer">this post</a> by Resig a couple of years ago. Resig's comments however were specific to libraries/framework code, i.e. code that will be consumed by other [domain-specific] applications/sites. I think feature detection is without question a good fit for libraries/frameworks. For domain-specific applications however I'm not so sure browser detection is that bad. It's suitable for working around known browser characteristics that are difficult to feature-detect, or for browsers that have bugs in their implementation of the feature itself. Times that browser detection is appropriate: <ul> <li>sites/applications that are not cross-browser and need to show a warning/dialog/DifferentPage tailoring to that client's browser. This is common in legacy applications.</li> <li>Banks or private sites with strict policies on what browsers and versions are supported (to avoid known security exploits that may compromise user's data)</li> <li>micro-optimizations: occasionally one browser is ridiculously faster than the others when performing some operation a certain way. It can be advantageous depending on your user base to branch on that particular browser/version.</li> <li>Lack of png transparency in IE6</li> <li>many display/rendering issues (read: IE css support) that are only witnessed in specific browser versions and you don't actually know what feature to test for.</li> </ul> That said, there are some <a href="https://developer.mozilla.org/en/Browser_Detection_and_Cross_Browser_Support" rel="noreferrer">major pitfalls</a> (probably committed by most of us) to avoid when doing browser detection.
Tags
Title
singulars
PostAcceptedAnswerId
1. This table or related slice is empty.
PostParentId
1. POBrowser detection versus feature detection
 singulars
 PostTypePostTypeId
 PTQuestion
PostTypePostTypeId
1. PTAnswer
UserLastEditorUserId
1. USCrescent Fresh
UserOwnerUserId
1. USCrescent Fresh
plurals
PostLinksPostIdRelatedPostId
1. This table or related slice is empty.
PostLinksRelatedPostIdPostId
1. This table or related slice is empty.
PostsAcceptedAnswerId
1. POBrowser detection versus feature detection
 singulars
 PostTypePostTypeId
 PTQuestion
PostsParentIdCreationDate
1. This table or related slice is empty.
VotesPostIdCreationDate
1. VO
 singulars
 PostPostId
 PO
 UserUserId
 This table or related slice is empty.
 VoteTypeVoteTypeId
 VTUpMod
2. VO
 singulars
 PostPostId
 PO
 UserUserId
 This table or related slice is empty.
 VoteTypeVoteTypeId
 VTUpMod
3. VO
 singulars
 PostPostId
 PO
 UserUserId
 This table or related slice is empty.
 VoteTypeVoteTypeId
 VTAcceptedByOriginator
CommentsPostId
1. This table or related slice is empty.

Querying!

Guidance

A row detail

Detail views are divided into sections. All the information in the data section comes from columns in the selected row. The other sections display data from other, related rows.

Related data can be related in a to-one or a to-many fashion. Captions of data related in a to-many fashion link to a list view showing a filtered view of the table.

Try moving around until you find a non-empty to-many entry and click on the label to get to one. You can move back to the root by clicking on the database name in the header.