Probably the best site for browser compatibility information is [CanIUse][ciu]. Here&#39;s the section on [history][his].

Summary - **IE9: no**, **IE10: yes** (as of platform preview 3)

The first Release Candidate of IE9 (released 10th Feb 2011) does not support history.pushState or history.replaceState. Generally no new features are added after a product gets to RC stage so it is very unlikely that the final IE9 will support these methods.

Microsoft have a good [overview for developers][1] of the features IE9 does have.

Update: **Internet Explorer 9 was launched** (on 14th March 2011) and definitely **does not support `history.pushState()` or `history.replaceState()`.**

Update 2: The current platform preview of [IE10 still does not support pushState / replaceState][2].

Update 3: Platform Preview 3 of IE10 **supports the history API!** [Details][3]


  [1]: http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/ie/ff468705
  [2]: http://blogs.msdn.com/b/ukmsdn/archive/2011/06/29/ie10-platform-preview-2-released.aspx
  [3]: http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ie/hh920758%28v=vs.85%29.aspx
  [ciu]: http://caniuse.com/
  [his]: http://caniuse.com/#feat=history


IE9 doesn&#39;t support it.

You can however use a work around using a Polyfill to get the functionality - History.js https://github.com/browserstate/history.js.

Modernizr do a good job listing HTML 5 Polyfills here https://github.com/Modernizr/Modernizr/wiki/HTML5-Cross-browser-Polyfills.

**The caveat is that it will add a query string to your URL in browsers that only support HTML 4 features.**



Internet Explorer 10 introduces support for the History interface of the HTML5 draft specification, which includes methods that enable you to manage a site&#39;s history stack and URL.

The original link:https://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ie/hh920758(v=vs.85).aspx

Btw you can get such error in reason of absolute path in pushState(). When i set relative path error was disappeared.

For some reason the empty view, a *TextView* in this case, always appears even when the *ListView* is not empty. I thought the *ListView* would automatically detect when to show the empty view.

    &lt;RelativeLayout android:id=&quot;@+id/LinearLayoutAR&quot;
        android:layout_height=&quot;fill_parent&quot;
        android:layout_width=&quot;fill_parent&quot;&gt;
        &lt;ListView android:id=&quot;@+id/ARListView&quot;
            android:layout_width=&quot;fill_parent&quot;
            android:layout_height=&quot;fill_parent&quot;&gt;&lt;/ListView&gt;
        &lt;ProgressBar android:id=&quot;@+id/arProgressBar&quot;
            android:layout_width=&quot;wrap_content&quot;
            android:layout_height=&quot;wrap_content&quot;
            android:layout_centerHorizontal=&quot;true&quot;
            android:layout_centerVertical=&quot;true&quot;&gt;&lt;/ProgressBar&gt;
        &lt;!-- Here is the view to show if the list is emtpy --&gt;
        &lt;TextView android:id=&quot;@id/android:empty&quot;
            android:layout_width=&quot;match_parent&quot;
            android:layout_height=&quot;match_parent&quot;
            android:text=&quot;No Results&quot; /&gt;
    &lt;/RelativeLayout&gt;

How can I hook up the empty view properly?

Showing empty view when ListView is empty

Using C#, Visual Studio 2010.

There is a namespace called [System.Web.Mvc](http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/system.web.mvc.aspx) documented on MSDN. The documentation for all the types in that namespace says that they are in `System.Web.Mvc.dll`.

However, when I go to Add Reference, “.NET” tab, this assembly is missing from the list. Why?

Why is System.Web.Mvc not listed in Add References?

Does anybody know if Internet Explorer supports the `history.pushState()` and `history.replaceState()` methods for [manipulating browser history][1]? Considering these are just being implemented in Firefox 4, I&#39;m not holding my breath, but does anybody know if they&#39;re coming in IE9?


  [1]: https://developer.mozilla.org/en/DOM/Manipulating_the_browser_history

Does Internet Explorer support pushState and replaceState?

<p>Does anybody know if Internet Explorer supports the <code>history.pushState()</code> and <code>history.replaceState()</code> methods for <a href="https://developer.mozilla.org/en/DOM/Manipulating_the_browser_history" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">manipulating browser history</a>? Considering these are just being implemented in Firefox 4, I'm not holding my breath, but does anybody know if they're coming in IE9?</p>


I have a class 

`.tab{filter: progid:DXImageTransform.Microsoft.gradient(startColorstr=&#39;#f5ffff&#39;, endColorstr=&#39;#e8f2f8&#39;);}`

and when one of the tabs is selected I want to remove the filter:

    .tab.selectedtab{/*what do I put here to remove the filter?*/}

In IE, how do I remove a filter?

I have this in the `&lt;head&gt;`:

    &lt;meta http-equiv=&quot;X-UA-Compatible&quot; content=&quot;IE=Edge&quot; /&gt;

It will force the latest rendering mode for IE, but is Compatibility Mode considered the last one?

I mean, for example: using this code with IE8, it will force it to use IE8 or IE8 Compatibility Mode?

IE Compatibility Mode: &#39;X-UA-Compatible&#39; tag &#39;Edge&#39;

How do I prevent a jQuery Ajax request from caching in Internet Explorer?

How to prevent a jQuery Ajax request from caching in Internet Explorer?

I want to rotate the DIV to a certain degree. In FF it functions but in IE I am facing a problem.

For example in the following style I can set rotation=1 to 4

     filter: progid:DXImageTransform.Microsoft.BasicImage(rotation=1);

This means that the DIV will be rotated to 90 or 180 or 270 or 360 degree. But if I need to rotate the DIV only 20 degrees, then it doesn&#39;t work anymore.

How may I solve this problem in IE?

CSS rotate property in IE

We are able to reliably recreate the following scenario:

1. Create a small HTML page that makes AJAX requests to a server (using HTTP POST)
2. Disconnect from the network and reconnect
3. Monitor the packets that IE generates after the failure

After a failed network connection, IE makes the next AJAX request but only sends the **HTTP header** (not the body) when doing the HTTP post. This causes all sorts of problems on the server as it is only a partial request. Google this issue with Bing and you&#39;ll find lots of people complaining about &quot;random server errors&quot; using AJAX or unexplained AJAX failures. 

We know that IE (unlike most other browsers) always sends an HTTP POST as TWO TCP/IP packets. The header and body is sent separately. In the case directly after a failure, **IE only sends the header**. IE never sends the payload and the server eventually responds with a Timeout.

So my question is - why does it behave this way? It seems wrong based on the HTTP spec and other browsers don&#39;t behave this way. Is it simply a bug? Surely this creates havoc in any serious AJAX based Web application.

**Reference information:**

There is a similar problem, triggered by HTTP keep-alive timeouts that are shorter than 1 minute and is documented here:

http://us.generation-nt.com/xmlhttprequest-post-sometimes-fails-when-server-using-keep-aliv-help-188813541.html

http://support.microsoft.com/default.aspx?kbid=831167


Why does Internet Explorer not send HTTP post body on Ajax call after failure?

I have a problem and I can&#39;t figure out what exactly is causing this behavior.  I cannot access my input fields and `textarea`s on my HTML form.

Unfortunately, the JS, HTML and CSS are very large, so I can&#39;t really post it all here. 

Can anybody tell me what to look for when debugging this strange behavior?

**UPDATE**

If I move the cursor over the `input` field I can see the text cursor, but when I click it the field does not get the focus.  I can access the field via pressing the &lt;kbd&gt;Tab&lt;/kbd&gt; key and if I right click on it and then click on the field I also get the focus for it.

...and nope, they don&#39;t have the `disabled` or `readonly` attributes ;-)

HTML input fields does not get focus when clicked

I have just installed IE9 beta and on a specific site I created (HTML5) IE9 jumps to compatibility mode unless I manually tell it not to. I have tried removing several parts of the website but no change. Including removing all CSS includes. On some other website of me it goes just fine.

Also, don&#39;t set it manually because then IE9 remembers the user setting and you can&#39;t turn it back to automatic (or at least I haven&#39;t found how, not even via private browsing and emptying cache)

Anyway. The site where it jumps to compatibility mode: http://alliancesatwar.com/guide/  
One where it renders correct: http://geuze.name/basement/ (I can&#39;t post more than 1 hyperlink)

Both use the same `doctype` and all. Those sites have a lot in common(apart from appearance) using the same basic template(encoding, meta tags, doctype and the same javascript)

It would be great if someone has an answer for me! An HTML5 website that renders in IE7-mode is pretty... lame.


Why does IE9 switch to compatibility mode on my website?

Why can&#39;t I pass in html attributes to `EditorFor()`? eg; 

    &lt;%= Html.EditorFor(model =&gt; model.Control.PeriodType, 
        new { disabled = &quot;disabled&quot;, readonly = &quot;readonly&quot; }) %&gt;

I don&#39;t want to use metadata

**Update**: The solution was to call this from the view :

     &lt;%=Html.EditorFor( model =&gt; model.Control.PeriodEndDate, new {Modifiable=model.Control.PeriodEndDateModifiable})%&gt;

and use `ViewData[&quot;Modifiable&quot;]` in my custom EditorTemplates/String.ascx where I have some view logic that determines whether to add readonly and/or disabled attributes to the input
The anonymous object passed into `EditorFor()` is a parameter called `additionalViewData` and its properties are passed to the editor template in the `ViewData` collection.

Html attributes for EditorFor() in ASP.NET MVC

Is there a way to remove the default blue hyperlink colour from a telephone number when viewed on an iPhone? Like a specific Mobile Safari tag or CSS to add?

I only have this in place for the number:

    &lt;p id=&quot;phone-text&quot;&gt;Call us on &lt;strong&gt;+44 (0)20 7194 8000&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;

And there are no hyperlinks but iPhone still renders this text number as a hyperlink.  I have this rendering issue on some of my websites but can&#39;t see why this is occurring.

I did read this post:

https://stackoverflow.com/questions/3712475/mobile-html-rendering-numbers

But is that the only solution possible? 


How do I remove the blue styling of telephone numbers on iPhone/iOS?

Does min-height not work on body/html?

    body, html
    {
        min-height:100%;
    }

Accomplishes absolutely nothing (firebug reports the body,html tags height does not change at all)

min-height does not work with body

I am looking into using the HTML5 History API to resolve deep linking problems with AJAX loaded content, but I am struggling to get off the ground. Does any one know of any good resources?

I want to use this as it seems a great way to allow to the possibility of those being sent the links may not have JS turned on. Many solutions fail when someone with JS sends a link to someone without.

My initial research seems to point to a History API within JS, and the pushState method.

http://html5demos.com/history

Good tutorial for using HTML5 History API (Pushstate?)

So now that HTML5 introduces [`history.pushState`][1] to change the browsers history, websites start using this in combination with Ajax instead of changing the fragment identifier of the URL.

Sadly that means that those calls cannot be detect anymore by `onhashchange`.

**My question is:** Is there a reliable way (hack? ;)) to detect when a website uses `history.pushState`? The specification does not state anything about events that are raised (at least I couldn&#39;t find anything).  
I tried to create a facade and replaced `window.history` with my own JavaScript object, but it didn&#39;t have any effect at all.

**Further explanation:** I&#39;m developing a Firefox add-on that needs to detect these changes and act accordingly.  
I know there was a similar question a few days ago that asked whether listening to some [DOM events][2] would be efficient but I would rather not rely on that because these events can be generated for a lot of different reasons.


**Update:**

[Here is a jsfiddle][3] (use Firefox 4 or Chrome 8) that shows that `onpopstate` is not triggered when `pushState` is called (or am I doing something wrong? Feel free to improve it!).

**Update 2:**

Another (side) problem is that `window.location` is not updated when using `pushState` (but I read about this already here on SO I think).


  [1]: http://www.w3.org/TR/html5/history.html#the-history-interface
  [2]: https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Web/Events
  [3]: http://jsfiddle.net/fkling/vV9vd/

How to get notified about changes of the history via history.pushState?

Many people have been saying, use pushState rather than hashbang.

What I don&#39;t understand is, how would you be search-engine friendly without using hashbang?

Presumably your pushState content is generated by client-side JavaScript code.

The scenario is thusly:

I&#39;m on `example.com`. My user clicks a link: `href=&quot;example.com/blog&quot;`

pushState captures the click, updates the URL, grabs a JSON file from somewhere, and creates the listing of blog posts in the content area.

With hashbangs, google knows to go to the escaped_fragment URL to get their static content.

With pushState, Google just sees nothing as it can&#39;t use the JavaScript code to load the JSON and subsequently create the template.

The only way to do it I can see is to render the template on the server side, but that completely negates the benefits of pushing the application layer to the client.

So am I getting this right, pushState is not SEO friendly for client-side applications at all?


pushState and SEO

There are a lot of cool tools for making powerful &quot;single-page&quot; JavaScript websites nowadays. In my opinion, this is done right by letting the server act as an API (and nothing more) and letting the client handle all of the HTML generation stuff. The problem with this &quot;pattern&quot; is the lack of search engine support. I can think of two solutions:

 1. When the user enters the website, let the server render the page exactly as the client would upon navigation. So if I go to `http://example.com/my_path` directly the server would render the same thing as the client would if I go to `/my_path` through pushState.
 2. Let the server provide a special website only for the search engine bots. If a normal user visits `http://example.com/my_path` the server should give him a JavaScript heavy version of the website. But if the Google bot visits, the server should give it some minimal HTML with the content I want Google to index.

The first solution is discussed further [here](https://stackoverflow.com/questions/6193858/pushstate-and-seo). I have been working on a website doing this and it&#39;s not a very nice experience. It&#39;s not DRY and in my case I had to use two different template engines for the client and the server.

I think I have seen the second solution for some good ol&#39; Flash websites. I like this approach much more than the first one and with the right tool on the server it could be done  quite painlessly.

So what I&#39;m really wondering is the following:

 * Can you think of any better solution?
 * What are the disadvantages with the second solution? If Google in some way finds out that I&#39;m not serving the exact same content for the Google bot as a regular user, would I then be punished in the search results?

&quot;Single-page&quot; JS websites and SEO

I&#39;m developing a webpage where depending on the next or back actions I do the correspondent animation, the problem comes when using the pushstate. When I receive the event how do I know if the user clicked back or forward history buttons using the Pushstate API?, or do I have to implement something myself? 

Content Type	Original Author	Original Content on Stackoverflow
Question	David Johnstone	View Question on Stackoverflow
Solution 1 - Internet Explorer	dave1010	View Answer on Stackoverflow
Solution 2 - Internet Explorer	Sebastian Patten	View Answer on Stackoverflow
Solution 3 - Internet Explorer	QC-cheetah	View Answer on Stackoverflow
Solution 4 - Internet Explorer	f0rmat1k	View Answer on Stackoverflow

Does Internet Explorer support pushState and replaceState?

Internet Explorer Problem Overview

Internet Explorer Solutions

Solution 1 - Internet Explorer

Solution 2 - Internet Explorer

Solution 3 - Internet Explorer

Solution 4 - Internet Explorer

Why is System.Web.Mvc not listed in Add References?

Showing empty view when ListView is empty

Attributions