Re: w3m -> standard, lynx -> optional

[Miles Bader <miles@lsi.nec.co.jp>]

Matt Zimmerman <mdz@debian.org> writes:
> > links:
> >         supports frames
> > w3m
> >         supports http_proxy, and related environment variables.
> 
> w3m also supports frames.

... and links supports http_proxy, so that's a wash... :-)

My feeling is that it's pretty much a matter of taste which is better
(e.g. with keybindings -- I hate w3m's keybindings, especially the
`spacial' link navigation).

I've tried both and I _much_ prefer links.  It feels smoother, cleaner,
and less clunky than w3m, but as far as I can tell, has about the same
number of features.

Whatever the case, though, w3m certainly shouldn't just have been made
standard without some discussion.

-Miles
-- 
If you can't beat them, arrange to have them beaten.  [George Carlin]