Re: lynx-dev Re: Forms handling

[dickey]

> On Thu, Jan 21, 1999, address@hidden (address@hidden) said: 
> | 
> | when you think it's stable enough, I'll put it in (ifdef'd).  my impression 
> | from your earlier posting was that you thought it was still too 
> experimental. 
>  
> Well ... the two patches that implement the original methodology seem to 
> be working as advertised, and could be #ifdef included, to provide some 
> additional functionality/testing/feedback. 

ok (will do that).  iirc, yours was the only sizable change I had leftover
from dev.14
  
> That's coming along, but will be awhile yet, as other responsibilities do 
> intrude on my available time.  Hopefully, I'll have an initial cut using 
> the revised methodology within a couple weeks (but don't hold me to that 
> prediction :-) ). 

sure - miracle/breakthrough scheduled for mid-February.
  
> Your call as to whether or not to ifdef in the original method. 

I don't know yet - that was an impression (based on some discussion about
change in user's expectations).
  
> /kim 


-- 
Thomas E. Dickey
address@hidden
http://www.clark.net/pub/dickey