Re: w3m -> standard, lynx -> optional
On Thu, Jan 22, 2004 at 08:03:04AM -0600, Steve Greenland wrote:
> On 21-Jan-04, 21:52 (CST), Marc Wilson <msw@cox.net> wrote:
> > Speaking as someone who has absolutely no interest in what some idiot
> > thinks his web page is supposed to look like, and is rather there to get
> > what he wants and leave... I prefer lynx.
>
> Uh, lynx is not being removed.
I didn't say it was. I was detailing why I found a minimum feature set
far more useful. The only reason links2 is even installed on any of my
boxen is because 'links -g' is a great replacement for Mozilla and all the
rest, especially once you build it with all the crap turned off.
> And while tables are (mis-)used for layout, they are still occasionally
> used to present table data, and lynx's lack of table support is
> annoying.
The first is FAR more prevalent than the second. All web authors are
idiots, and should be punished by being forced to actually *use* what they
create.
--
Marc Wilson | What sane person could live in this world and not
msw@cox.net | be crazy? -- Ursula K. LeGuin
Reply to: