History.js vs. window.history for HTML5-only mode -
does history.js offer substantial advantages on html5's window.history nowadays? we're not interested in supporting/falling html4 hashbang urls. history.js doesn't support anchors in pushstate() , while window.history does. need feature if there no big reasons use history.js instead of native window.history in html5-only mode, we'd rather go latter. yes - on website say: provide cross-compatible experience html5 browsers (they implement html5 >history api little bit differently causing different behaviours , bugs - >history.js fixes ensuring experience expected / same / great throughout >the html5 browsers) those differences small, , googling wasn't enough find them - had in source code - seems main 1 fixing html5 functionality in safari. there 2 problems safari implementation - 1 history.back fails return hash state set location.hash susequently replaced history.replacestate. the second when busy safari fail apply state changes....