Why don't we switch back to using web history as the default for 2.2 but leave the old code in for now. We can deprecate it for removal in 5-6 months. That way people who are using the old way can still enable it in their apps and they have time to make the switch.
Simon Mac Donald http://hi.im/simonmacdonald On Wed, Sep 19, 2012 at 1:13 PM, Joe Bowser <bows...@gmail.com> wrote: > Hey > > There seems to be a lot of confusion as to how web history should > work, how it works now and what people should be doing with web > history. Currently, we have two web history APIs. One of which is > the shim that was put in to get around the old URI error, and the > other is the web browser history. For some reason, we're still using > the shim instead of the web browser history by default because it > works better with the apps that have already been deployed. However, > I would like to see web history adopted because of the following > reasons: > > 1. Consistency across browser > 2. Fixes issues with iFrames on Android > 3. Work-around no longer fixes the issue for 3.x and 4.0.x, since a > fix for the hash and param problem was merged back in 1.9.0 > > That being said, it's entirely possible that we're doing something > wrong with web history as it is, and based on the recent feedback from > people who don't understand how open source works (public mail good, > private mail bad), I think we should bring this up again. > > Thoughts? > > Joe
