W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > w3c-wai-ua@w3.org > October to December 2000

Re: lynx

From: Daniel Dardailler <danield@w3.org>
Date: Mon, 13 Nov 2000 15:01:51 +0100
Message-Id: <200011131401.eADE1p404800@zidane.inria.fr>
To: Ian Jacobs <ij@w3.org>
cc: w3c-wai-ua@w3.org

> However, shouldn't Lynx implement the accessibility features
> of HTML like other browsers? As for the DOM requirements, the
> WG has reinforced their presence in the document several occasions.

I gather that for HTML, compliance cannot be asserted to an older
version of the language, e.g. to HTML 3.2 ?

For DOM, since lynx is closer to a command line filter than it is to a 
real interactive application, the connection to DOM is dubious.

Could a couple [lynx + some separate libDOM] meets the checkpoint ?
In which case, since a libDOM exists somewhere one click away from the
lynx download page, this would just be a packaging issue.
Received on Monday, 13 November 2000 09:01:57 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 27 October 2009 06:50:22 GMT