Re: Holy Wars redux: w3 vs. emacs-w3m

[Sacha Chua]

happy@vole.com (mr.sparkle) writes:

> I found w3 to be sloooooow. emacs-w3m is reasonably fast and it
> renders html nicely. I use emacs-w3m as the browser for html files in
> dired and I have no complaints so far.

I briefly checked out ewb (Emacs Web Browser? I think it's on
EmacsWiki), but couldn't get it to run easily. I actually sort of like
Emacs/w3 in console mode (stops it from trying to render graphics and
stuff), although the default colors seem to suck when on a
light-on-dark terminal, so I defined my own CSS and forced its use.

It's actually quite usable, although rendering is slooooooow. I wonder
how that can be improved? I'm fine with not having tables displayed,
although I'd like to be able to navigate through them with keystrokes
and manipulate them with functions.

-- 
Sacha Chua <sacha@free.net.ph> - 4 BS CS Ateneo geekette
interests: emacs, gnu/linux, wearables, teaching compsci