site title

Stack Exchange API 1.1 and Improved App Gallery

02-11-11 by . 8 comments

We just rolled out version 1.1 of the Stack Exchange API. To see what’s new, browse the revised documentation at:

Rebecca took an informal survey of the API developer community at Stack Apps, and determined that what everyone wanted most (beyond v2 of the API, yes, I know) was an improved application gallery. So we’ve made the default page on the site the application gallery, and spruced it up to be more visually friendly to average users.

This should make it easier for Stack Exchange users to find your app and start using it!

Do bear in mind that we heavily promote both with house ads, and in the footer of every Stack Exchange site we launch. So developers, we have your back. If you build on our API, we will continue to fully support you in every way we can!

So browse our new, improved app gallery and check out our latest API additions. Even better, start building your own totally awesome apps with the Stack Exchange API! To make sure your app looks its best in the app gallery, be sure to follow the directions on How to List Your Application, Library, or Wrapper Here.

Filed under API, community, stackexchange


Hooray! This is a much-anticipated event. I’m so glad to see the new changes to the front page of StackApps.

A special thank-you to all those behind the new API changes too.

Kevin posted some roadmap info and a few more details here

as well

Simon Brown Feb 11 2011

Would it be safe to use the creation date as a site id?


No, use the site address with a lookup of aliases on misses. This is exactly how the Stack Exchange sites themselves work.

If you *really* need a number, synthesize one internally. Don’t rely on some random number not changing unless its documented (like question ids) to not change.

Arjan Feb 14 2011

I just read that some 1.0 methods supported POST, but no longer do so in 1.1 (like So, when getting a 404, then check if you’re using the right method.

No methods in 1.0 or 1.1 (with one exception, and you actually have to petition us to be able to use that method) have ever supported POST.

If you were getting away with it in 1.0, you should stop doing so immediately.

Arjan Feb 14 2011

@Kevin, I should have mentioned that I was not trying to say it should be supported, but just in case it matters: surely 1.0 supports POST for – see

But, I’ve never used the API, so no worries for me ;-)

interestingly, while I consider myself a prominent SE API developer, I was not included in this ‘informal survey’ but am not surprised.