- From: Anne van Kesteren <annevk@opera.com>
- Date: Tue, 08 Sep 2009 15:12:41 +0200
On Mon, 07 Sep 2009 23:30:42 +0200, Dimitri Glazkov <dglazkov at chromium.org> wrote: > My big issue with pushHistory is that it messes with the nature of the > Web: a URL is a resource you request from the server. Not something > you arrive to via clever sleight of hand in a user agent. So, you've > managed to pushState your way to > a.com/some/path/10/clicks/from/the/home/page. Now the user bookmarks > it. What are you going to do know? Intuitively, it feels like we > should be improving the user agent to eliminate the need for mucking > with history, not providing more tools to encourage it. FWIW, this is why I think pushState is great. If you bookmark it and later visit that page it allows the server to directly give the right content back instead of first loading a page which then fetches additional content based on the fragment identifier. And although disabling JavaScript these days is probably close to a non-starter it would allow you to create interfaces that have the same URL regardless of whether JavaScript is enabled or disabled and still use fancy effects and downloaded content incrementally when JavaScript is enabled. -- Anne van Kesteren http://annevankesteren.nl/
Received on Tuesday, 8 September 2009 06:12:41 UTC