Re: lynx-dev key-based vs. form-based Options Menu [was "Open issues"]

[Vlad Harchev]

On Sat, 1 Apr 2000, Henry Nelson wrote:

> > >> Would it be possible to get rid of or somehow re-do that message,
> > >> "(options marked with (!) will not be saved)?"  
> > > I think we have to accept, certainly for now,
> > > that some options get saved and some don't.
> > 
> > why?  it's a nuisance to everyone & seems to have no rational cause.
> 
> This has evolved into a development issue, so I'm starting a new thread.
> Corrections should be made to the form-based Options Menu as needed for a
> release, so let's not get the two issues mixed.
> 
> If you really feel having unsavable options on the form-based Options
> Menu is "a nuisance to everyone," then I think you have an incentive to
> work on improvement and development of the key-based Options Menu.  I
> wish I could, but to be perfectly honest, my days of Lynx development
> have all but ended.  I'll continue to strive to preserve in Lynx what
> I consider "superior" and to keep out "unwanted frills", but input will
> be zero.  For anyone at the entrance-level of c programming, I think
> the key-based Options Menu module would be an excellent place to jump
> in.  So I appeal to you:
> 
> 1)  How about taking off of the key-based Options Menu items that already
>     have a specific toggle key of their own, e.g., the RAW/CJK that Klaus
>     mentioned yesterday.

(Seems my ISP found alternate satellite channel...)

  I don't think removing items that have keyboard shortcuts is good - user has
to know keys for these commands. Also from the screen we have currently the 
user can deduce what he can change at all, and also by grouping of options 
user can deduce what options exist for changing some aspect (i.e. 
"show images" and "verbose images"). Removing them will make the screen less 
usable for novice user.

>[...]

 Best regards,
  -Vlad