lynx-dev
[Top][All Lists]
Advanced

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: LYNX-DEV CONTEXT patches for keystroke help files


From: Foteos Macrides
Subject: Re: LYNX-DEV CONTEXT patches for keystroke help files
Date: Tue, 04 Feb 1997 15:42:14 -0500 (EST)

address@hidden (Larry W. Virden, x2487) wrote:
>Sorry that I used the more common -U format than context last time.
>[...]

        OK.  I added a reminder about that to the pre-release cover page.

        Joe Kincaid's cross-referenced CHANGES service is really nice!
I added a link to that in the cover page.  It might be a good idea to get
rid of any space within the anchor contents for the A - Z link list.  For
users not yet facile with the Lynx navigation commands, note that when
you are in a toolbar or on a line with numerous links, you can use the
DOWN_LINK ('>') or UP_LINK ('<') commands instead of the arrow keys to go
to the next, or previous, link completely below, or above, the current
line (i.e., you don't have to navigate though each letter of an A - Z link
list). 

        We've discussed this at length before, and, with the typos
in the description of the User-Agent string option fixed, perhaps it
will be more clear.  However, the issue is not about a trademarked
string.  It is about a false pretense within the context of the
http protocol.  When Lynx sends a User-Agent request to a server,
it can be parsed according to that protocol.  What precedes the
first slash identifies the software, what immediately follows the
slash identifies the version of that software, and then optional,
space-separated supplementary information fields can follow.  If
you set up Lynx to send:

User-Agent: Mozilla/3.0 (compatible)

you are claiming that the request came from copyrighted software
(Netscape v3.0), which is untrue, and whether the "compatible"
supplementary information absolves you of a copyright infringement
is an as yet untested legal question.  The warning that Netscape
considers it a copyright infringement most certainly should be
retained by Lynx.

        I can't imagine (but it's *just* my personal opinion) that
Netscape would take legal action if Lynx users occassionally did
that to see if in fact Lynx could handle what a site discriminating
against Lynx is offering, and then took the initiative to inform
that WebMaster that it's descrimination is unjustified.  But who
knows for sure?!?!?

                                Fote

=========================================================================
 Foteos Macrides            Worcester Foundation for Biomedical Research
 address@hidden         222 Maple Avenue, Shrewsbury, MA 01545
=========================================================================
;
; To UNSUBSCRIBE:  Send a mail message to address@hidden
;                  with "unsubscribe lynx-dev" (without the
;                  quotation marks) on a line by itself.
;

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]