Re: Accessibility

Benjamin Franz (
Mon, 1 Jul 1996 22:13:55 -0700 (PDT)

Date: Mon, 1 Jul 1996 22:13:55 -0700 (PDT)
From: Benjamin Franz <>
To: Ka-Ping Yee <>
Cc: Chris Serflek <>,,
Subject: Re: Accessibility
In-Reply-To: <>
Message-Id: <>

On Tue, 2 Jul 1996, Ka-Ping Yee wrote:

> Chris Serflek wrote:
> > 
> > You are correct.  We do have many keyboard shortcuts, but saying "first"
> > is ignoring early browsers like Lynx.
> Careful.  Lynx is not "early" in the sense of "ancient";
> it is currently used in many, many places, and development
> continues.

Don't fool yourself. Lynx has been losing market share ever since Mosaic
came out. My numbers currently put it at around one percent of the market
- and still falling. This is *after* correcting for the bias of graphics
on hit counts - before the correction lynx is down to one-sixth of a
percent. For the record - NCSA Mosaic is doing even worse - it is down to
a mere one-half of a percentage point even though it does support
graphics. I suspect that outside the .edu domain it is much lower than
even that (you can see a bias in the .edu domain towards NCSA servers too
- com domains use Apache at nearly the 39% level while edu domains use it
at a mere 12%). I would make a heavy bet that outside of the edu domains
lynx is below one tenth of one percent. I'll collect some numbers to
verify that. 

What lynx needs more than *anything* else right now is table support -
because many people have ceased to even consider how a non-table browser
will render something. As long as the concensus of lynx-dev is represented
by <URL:>, lynx will
remain below the minumum feature level for me to even worry about. Even
_AOL_ supports tables now. 

Without tables - lynx *is* obsolete (which is what I think you actually
meant when you said 'ancient'). 

Benjamin Franz