You’re right: it doesn’t identify the device type, so the title is misleading.

The intended point is that device type is often the wrong thing to detect: a touchscreen laptop may expose both coarse and fine pointers, while a tablet may be connected to a mouse or trackpad. The snippet detects available input capabilities instead, which is usually what the interface should respond to.

I wasn’t particularly careful with the titles, but this one should be "Detect input capabilities". Thanks for the heads-up!

It has all the hallmarks of just telling an agent to scrape MDN and make a website

fwiw I find `*` a lot easier in regular use than all of `-d 1 .`. It doesn't automatically expand to dotfiles but for regular typing, this advice looks like something you'd do if you're a robot or making an alias

You’re absolutely right, thanks for the feedback. I initially included live examples (mostly through CodePen), but they were taking too much time to maintain, so I stopped.

The Bash entry was really just a half-finished personal note that I never properly edited. It’s probably out of scope too.

Yeah, that was the first one my eyes went to. The only scenarios I can think of where it is acceptable to hide scrollbars are infinite canvases where you’ll draw your own non-linear ones (and even then be disappointed because they can’t look or behave natively), and things like maps where you remap scrolling to zoom and might want to use a backing invisible scroll area for that rather than consuming scroll events (which are somewhat more limited).

In short: unless the native scroll bar will be wrong, do not under any circumstances hide it.

If you mean the "Hide scrollbars" note, I agree 100% (:

There are a few specific situations where it can be useful, but I added the caveat precisely because it’s generally not a good practice.

Only time I've seen that work is when making a carousel. Once you're using scroll snap it's already not going to behave the way you'd expect a scrollable container to, so having a different indicator doesn't feel so egregious to me.

Yes. MDN and caniuse.com are great. See also https://webstatus.dev and https://web.dev/baseline

[dead]

Not AI, just not a native speaker.

How is an archived web site supposed to be a good resource on modern html and css development exactly?

Sure, they're not "tricks", but it's also definitely not the same as what you get randomly browsing formal documentation.

What's the difference?

That’s fair, "tricks" may be overselling it. The website is meant to be a small, opinionated collection of features I want to remember, not a replacement for an authoritative reference like MDN. I can probably make that positioning clearer.