lynx-dev Y2K compliance (was nothing)

[Philip Webb]

981008 Tina Lascelles wrote: 
> On behalf of 44 federal government departments,
                 ^
in the Land of Peace, Order & Good Government: you should say so!

> several of which use your products,

it's always good to learn how widely Lynx is spreading:
it really does encourage the volunteer developers.

> we are reviewing departmental inventories of software & hardware
> presently in use.  We are also conducting research
> aimed at the readiness of these products for the year 2000.
> After looking into your website on year 2000 readiness,
> we are requesting further detail for our own records.
> Could you please fill out the enclosed questionnaire,
                                ^^^^^^^^ ???
> and return it to us as soon as it is convenient for you to do so.
> We are looking specifically into:  . Lynx (Sun Solaris)
 
the official Lynx blurb on the subject is in the distribution README:

YEAR 2000 COMPLIANCE

   We believe Lynx works properly for the Year 2000 issues,
   since it does not store dates in 2-digit form.
   Since it must communicate with a wide range of web servers,
   it interprets dates in a variety of formats.
   In particular, if Lynx receives a date with a 2-digit year,
   it assumes that values less than 70 are in the range 2000-2069.

if you have any further problems, please ask again here.
   
-- 
========================,,============================================
SUPPORT     ___________//___,  Philip Webb : address@hidden
ELECTRIC   /] [] [] [] [] []|  Centre for Urban & Community Studies
TRANSIT    `-O----------O---'  University of Toronto