lynx-dev
[Top][All Lists]
Advanced
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: lynx-dev internal links

From: Michael Warner
Subject: Re: lynx-dev internal links
Date: Thu, 3 Sep 1998 22:10:24 -0700 
On Fri, Sep 04, 1998, address@hidden <address@hidden> wrote:

><HTML>
><HEAD><TITLE>Subject: Re: lynx-dev internal links</TITLE></HEAD>
><BODY><pre>

>> >...
>> > The gist is that Lynx can be configured to recognize links
>> > within a document that don't behave the way Fote interpreted
>> > someone's draft
>
>"someone"?!

Ah, all that stuff about standards 'n RFC's 'n stuff is just
intellectual gymnastics, anyway.  We don't need to worry about
it.  So, is that Fielding guy anybody important?

[I'd like to claim that paragraph was Socratic Irony, or
something equally distinguished-sounding, but I'm afraid it was
just sarcasm]

I haven't read to the end of the thread yet, but so far no
one has mentioned that the (possibly) definitive discussion
seems to be the 1997-11-03 entry in the CHANGES2.8 file.

>> > proposal.  (He's more than likely correct, but spent a lot
>> > of words without pinpointing the exact issue - ading words
>> > to an argument doesn't make it cleared).  It's in the code
>> > now, but not normally activated.
>>
>> Oh, are internal links the same as hidden or invisible links?
>
>Is Lynx a sinking ship?

I'd say not yet, but some ballast may need to be jettisoned.
I just hope it's not me.

>__Henry
>
></pre></body></html>

I assume you're still playing around with lynx's mail
function.

If lynx generates mail like this (the busted Content-Type: was
particularly annoying), I nominate it to join news on Lynx-Lite's
ash heap of history.  I'd much rather see lynx call *real*
mail/news clients via, I assume, a refined and well-documented
EXTERN set up.

Just my preference.

-- 
Michael Warner 
<address@hidden>
reply via email to
[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]