Re: lynx-dev LYNX: more pleas for the L-page addrs

[David Combs]

> From address@hidden Mon Jan 18 01:10:04 1999
> From: Bela Lubkin <address@hidden>
> Date: Mon, 18 Jan 1999 00:58:29 -0800

> <snip>

> If your "user mode" is "advanced", you can see the URLs on the status
> line of the L-page -- one at a time, by moving the cursor to each link.
> At some point in this discussion I seem to remember your stating that
> this was not true.  It is for me, and I find it sufficient.
> 
Well, that sure isn't sufficient for me.  If that's what you are
going to do on the L-page, look at the addresses one at a time
by cursoring to the TITLE of the link (once you have visited that
site, by someone's DWIM (actually DWHM do what HE/HER meant, back then)
code, the address disappears and the title comes up in its place) --
well, why have the L-page at all?

I mean, you can do that quite nicely on the MAIN page -- cursoring
to a TITLE, then looking at the status-line.  If that is enough to
keep you happy, why EVER go to the L-page?

For me at least, the PURPOSE of the L-page is so I can see ALL the
links (and their addresses :-(   ) nicely lined up.  I mean, if
that's not what I want, why in the world would I ever use the L-page.

And why would I (were it me) IMPLEMENT the thing?

> Perhaps an option could be instituted where the L-page would display
> either the titles (as now, substituting URL when title isn't known); or

I don't understand this "when the title isn't known" stuff.  The title
is sitting there looking at me on the MAIN page.  How can it not "be known",
when there it is?

> always the URL.  Then, specially on the L-page, the status line would

Again, this status-line stuff.  If I want to get an address via the
status-line, I'll just do that on the MAIN page!  I can see NO reason
to go to the L-page to do what I perfectly well do on the MAIN page!

> show the other choice: that is, either always the URL, or title, falling
> back to URL.  Then you could set this to "always show URL", and *still*
> see titles, by moving the cursor to each link.  The advantage of this is
> that no extra screen space would be needed; the layout of the L-page
> wouldn't be affected at all.
> 

But I really want to see the ADDRESS (regardless of whether I've been
there or not already); that's why I CHOSE to go to the L-page.

The BENEFIT of the L-page, to me at least (even if to no one else!),
is that I can lean back in my chair and gaze at the screen and just
LOOK AROUND without pushing ANY keys (except for going fwd or back
a screen-page's worth of those addrs).

Hell, for sitting-back-and-gazing purposes, it would be EVEN BETTER
to have BOTH the addresses AND THE TITLES TOO.


---

Re "without using extra screen space"; why is THAT so important?

Let it be an OPTION how that works; let the USER decide how important
screen-space is!  Options might be:
  Work as at least ONE person (the original L-page implementor!)
      wanted; once visited, addr disappears and title appears.
      I cannot imagine who would really want such a thing; but,
      since that implementor went to the work to add it when
      he/she gave us the L-page, don't take it from him/her.

  Show "you've been there" via asterisk at left margin.

  Show ONLY the addr, REGARDLESS of having been there before.

  Show ONLY the title (gotten from the MAIN page).

  Show BOTH addr AND title (gotten from MAIN page)

NUMBER these options eg 1-5.  For simple entry,
  let the user type in eg "nynny", for don't work
   original way, yes to asterisk, no to only addr
   or only title, yes to always show BOTH of them.
 
(this crude scheme can be fancied up later on)

Since there's so much controversy on this I-thought-obvious
issue (not obvious at all, it seems), give everyone 
ALL the options.  Probably no 8 or whatever people
chosen at random will choose the same combination!,
from reading all the email on this (much of it generated by me,
I must admit).

I say again, if the purpose of the L-page is for
sitting backing and just gazing around that page,
ignoring the status line (since you are not cursoring
anywhere; the only movement being screen-page fwd 
and back) -- then the more info there to gaze at,
the better.  Seems to me.



> To be clear: I mean a choice of EITHER:
> 
>   1. title-or-URL
>   2. title-or-URL
>   3. title-or-URL
>   statusline: URL of what the cursor's on
> 
> (as current); OR:
> 
>   1. URL
>   2. URL
>   3. URL
>   statusline: title-or-URL of what the cursor's on
> 
> (as I imagine David might want).
> 
> >Bela<
> 


Again, the above suggestion from Bela is 100% via
the status line.  If that is what he likes to do,
see things via the status line, why in the world
does he go to the L-page to do it?

Puzzles me.

David