Meta Stack Exchange is where users like you discuss bugs, features, and support issues that affect the software powering all 158 Stack Exchange communities.

What is meta?
Here's how it works:
  1. Any Stack Exchange user can ask a question
  2. The community provides support, votes on ideas, and reports bugs
  3. Your voice helps shape the way Stack Exchange operates

I am wondering what is authentic Vanilla javascript? Difference between vanilla vs traditional javascript? Do you know any website to learn about it?

This is not a real question according to the votes, but there's about six answers for it.

How can not-real questions have real answers?

share|improve this question
This is splitting hairs. The OP's question is obviously more one about the english language, one that has been answered fully and doesn't really have a place on SO – Pëkka Feb 23 '12 at 18:13
@pekka and doesn't belong on ELU either. (general reference) – simchona Feb 23 '12 at 18:15
"Off-Topic" is probably a better close reason. – Robert Harvey Feb 23 '12 at 18:17
What about those answers did you think qualified as "real"? Mmm, I love me some unadulterated ice cream! – Cody Gray Feb 23 '12 at 18:28

The problem with that question is that it's hard to suspend disbelief without an external link referencing where the term "Vanilla Javascript" is being used, in context.

In the absence of such a reference, it's merely an English Usage question.

share|improve this answer
Please don't send it to ELU. I promise it'll be closed because it'd be marked general reference (use of "vanilla") – simchona Feb 23 '12 at 18:09
Wasn't planning to. :) – Robert Harvey Feb 23 '12 at 18:10

This is not a real question according to the votes, but there's about six answers for it.

Generally speaking, the fact there are different answers could be a sign that is not clear what the OP is asking.
In the specific, the question is asking about authentic vanilla JavaScript, which doesn't seem to have a well-defined meaning. (Is it referring to ECMAScript versus JavaScript implementations done from different browsers?)

It's difficult to tell what is being asked here. This question is ambiguous, vague, incomplete, overly broad, or rhetorical and cannot be reasonably answered in its current form. See the FAQ.

share|improve this answer

Your question is based on the premise that the close votes for "Not a real question" were valid; I don't think they were.

As soon as I saw the question I assumed OP was referring to plain old JavaScript / dom manipulation, without any frameworks like jQuery or MooTools added on. And the answers seem to confirm that.

I think the question was valid, and shouldn't have been closed.

Then again, the question may not be closely related enough to an actual programming problem to be on-topic at Stack Overflow. It might be in that ever narrowing window of questions that are off-topic, but can be moved to Programmers.SE. This question seems no worse than plenty of what I've seen over there.

share|improve this answer
What is authentic vanilla [fill in the blank]? – Robert Harvey Feb 23 '12 at 18:11
@Robert - what's in the blank? OP was asking about vanilla JavaScript. I think that's a fairly common term with a fairly clear answer. Authentic vanilla Google? Well, that's not really a term. I guess I don't follow your point – Adam Rackis Feb 23 '12 at 18:13
My point is that this is one of those questions that has an infinite number of variations, like "Best book for [my favorite technology]." That, and the question is not specific to the programming profession, a characteristic that makes it off-topic for both Programmers.SE and Stack Overflow. – Robert Harvey Feb 23 '12 at 18:15
Flush to webmasters? – The Community Feb 23 '12 at 18:18
@Robert - how is this not specific to the programming profession? Who else would ask about what vanilla JavaScript means (and care about the answer) than a programmer – Adam Rackis Feb 23 '12 at 18:19
@GGG: It got a pretty poor reception here. I doubt that it would fare better at Webmasters. Like I said, if the OP had provided a link to the original text where he saw the term, I think it might have gotten a better reception. – Robert Harvey Feb 23 '12 at 18:20
I agree with @Robert. The question wasn't particularly good, (and probably wouldn't fit at webmasters), but I do think it was a real question. Though my standards are a bit more lax around here :-) – Adam Rackis Feb 23 '12 at 18:21
@AdamRackis: I see what you are saying. I certainly don't think it should have gotten the negative reception that it did. But I can't control how people vote, and I don't really see how the question (and its answers) would be of value to anyone else. – Robert Harvey Feb 23 '12 at 18:21
I'm sorry you think so little of our site, but this question is a call for opinions and bike-shedding about what "authentic vanilla" JavaScript is and we don't want it on Programmers. – user149432 Feb 23 '12 at 18:22
@Robert - negative response indeed. 10 downvotes and counting. Clearly this question has angered the meta :) – Adam Rackis Feb 23 '12 at 18:22
@Mark - you misunderstand. I like PSE. I like that there's a place where open-ended questions that call for speculation can thrive. Stuff like that is a joy to read. I just wish you all wouldn't be so self-righteous. It's like you're trying to compensate for how much less serious your content is compared to Stack Overflow. – Adam Rackis Feb 23 '12 at 18:25
@AdamRackis And I'd wish you'd stop trying to tell people their questions are welcome on a site you clearly have no vested interest in. Programmers is not the right place for these questions, and telling people it is does a disservice to the people who are actually involved: the person asking when their question gets closed twice, and Programmers.SE, which has to deal with crappy migrations due to people wildly misinterpreting what the site is for. – user149432 Feb 23 '12 at 18:35
@Mark - I wish instead of flaming on me, and throwing a tantrum every time something bad gets migrated, you would just explain the criterion that allows for speculation-friendly questions like the above, or this one, but not ever anything SO tries to migrate. Currently that question is at +3, with 8 answers, almost all of which based around anecdotes or speculation. – Adam Rackis Feb 23 '12 at 18:40
@AdamRackis Thanks, closed: if you're interested in helping us help you better understand what the site's for by cleaning up questions like that, consider participating in our cleanup effort, which'll be far more productive than making assumptions about what's on-topic on a site you don't use based on a single question. Is the fact that this question is still open proof positive Stack Overflow is for computer support? Of course not. Why not apply the same common sense to other sites? – user149432 Feb 23 '12 at 19:04
Happy to help, @Mark :) If those questions are off-topic, then your argument is definitely more coherent—the point of course would have been more forcefully made if your community had closed those questions, rather than you doing it unilaterally after I put them in front of you. And yes, there are many, many old SO questions from 2008 that are not representative of current standards. – Adam Rackis Feb 23 '12 at 20:06

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .