W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > w3c-wai-ig@w3.org > October to December 2001

Re: Minimal Browser Capabilities

From: Access Systems <accessys@smart.net>
Date: Tue, 25 Dec 2001 16:38:21 -0500 (EST)
To: Tina Marie Holmboe <tina@elfi.elfi.org>
cc: w3c-wai-ig@w3.org
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.21.0112251633390.12892-100000@smarty.smart.net>
On Tue, 25 Dec 2001, Tina Marie Holmboe wrote:

> On Tue, Dec 25, 2001 at 10:16:49AM -0800, Kynn Bartlett wrote:
> > Does it do CSS?  Does it do HTML 4.01?  Does it do DOM?  Does it do
> > XHTML?   Does it do JavaScript?
>   Before asking such questions, it is often more cost-effective to
>   check the appropriate sources of information. I suggest reading
> 
>     http://lynx.isc.org/release/features.html
>   and the links found there, among them:
>    http://www.trill-home.com/lynx/development.html

yeah, which I did check but couldn't remember from one computer screen to
the next  ;8*{

> > Lynx support for major web standards is lagging far behind where it
> 
>   That would be incorrect - but of course depending on *which* standards
>   you are referring to. 
> 
>   Lynx has extensive support for HTML 2.0 (including the LINK element
>   which so far both MS and Netscape have had a hard time dealing with),
>   HTML 3.0 (for better or for worse) and HTML 4.01. It also handles
>   XHTML (including <br/> instead of the bastardization <br />, ie. better
>   than Netscape 4), correctly handles <script> even with the comment-hack
>   inside it, correctly handles SGML comments including the Netscape and IE
>   bugs for the same.
> 
>   Lynx handles cookies, SSL, tables, frames and the frightfully annoying
>   META refresh hack. It handles 8bit and unicode text, though I admit that
>   it doesn't do file upload.

cookies I hate unless they are from the oven, so I am set to reject all
cookies and it does handle frames in a really "Wierd" way but once you get
used to it, it's not too bad

>   Feel free to supplement this list with what you believe Netscape 2 handles
>   that Lynx doesn't.

netscape in all it's variations has a much much higher noise to signal
ratio

>   I do hope your gripe with Lynx isn't the fact that it doesn't support 100%
>   of the "dancing clown" syndrome; I have yet to see *any* browser which

if for no other reason that by itself it good enough to reccomend LYNX
even if it did nothing else.

>   fully support *every W3C standard* - including Lynx.
> 
>   Personally I'd say that Lynx supports (ie. does something reasonable with)
>   HTML 2.0 through 4.01 better than both IE and NS < 6. I like it that way.

I think there must be some "bias" or something against non comercial
software ?!?!?!

Glad I'm not the only Lynx junkie holding down the fort

Bob

   ASCII Ribbon Campaign                        accessBob                       
    NO HTML/PDF/RTF in e-mail                   accessys@smartnospam.net       
    NO MSWord docs in e-mail                    Access Systems, engineers       
    NO attachments in e-mail,  *LINUX powered*   access is a civil right 
*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#
THIS message and any attachements are CONFIDENTIAL and may be
privledged.  They are intended ONLY for the individual or entity named
above. If you are not the intended recipient, Please notify the sender as
soon as possible. Please DO NOT READ, COPY, USE, or DISCLOSE this
communication to others and DELETE it from your computer systems.  Thanks
Received on Tuesday, 25 December 2001 16:17:43 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 19 July 2011 18:13:59 GMT