Re: Minimal Browser Capabilities

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



> Lynx support for major web standards is lagging far behind where it
> could be.  Lynx is roughly at the stage of, say, Netscape 2 or so.

  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.

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

  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
  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.

-- 
 - Tina Holmboe

Received on Tuesday, 25 December 2001 14:24:07 UTC