Re: LYNX-DEV Year 2000 Compliance

[Nelson Henry Eric]

> Perhaps it would be a good idea to add a small file (Y2K.doc) to the current

I would vote in favor of not adding more clutter to the distribution.
People who would be asking such a question are not going to bother
downloading the distribution, unpacking it and then reading through
all the docs to find out about it.  A statement on lynx.browser.org
might be somewhat effective.

Since the new release seems to be beginning to materialize, I would like
at this time to ask that the first paragraph of the top level README
file be put back in.  (Klaus removed it because it was premature.)  I
think it is important to make a statement, however unofficial, that
the release is "official."

At the same time the "Year 2000 Comliance" question could be answered
in the README file.  It could be one sentence stating that it is compliant,
perhaps with a reference to one of Fote's posts on the subject, e.g.,
   "URL: http://www.flora.org/lynx-dev/html/month0997/msg00615.html";.

__Henry