Re: w3m -> standard, lynx -> optional
On Wed, 28 Jan 2004 21:26:47 +0100
Petr Baudis <pasky@ucw.cz> wrote:
> interesting. Well, w3m uses colors to distinguish buttons and headings
> etc. (E)Links instead uses colors as was specified in the document
> (therefore, the page looks more like the author intended). Both has its
> benefits I suppose. You can already disable document colors in ELinks, I
> suppose I could add the w3m-style coloring support if there was a demand
> for it. (I didn't receive any suggestion that people want it yet.)
With respect to this discussion, though I suspect the decision's already
been made (I don't think it's a particularily bad one - w3m is pretty
capable; I prefer elinks though), caching support is probably more
important. Or, rather, good caching support. Just earlier in
#debian-devel somebody mentioned it.
Colors are nice and all, but consistency (with other browsers) in
something as fundamental as caching is probably more important. People
have grown used to caching being pretty transparent, without the need to
manually kick off downloads or tweak things.
(For those who aren't familiar with it, elinks doesn't expire cached
pages, you need to manually reload them. What's more, multiple elinks
instances share the same cache, so if you've got some forgotten instance
running somewhere with a page you're trying to view already loaded,
you'll possibly get a very outdated page.)
Reply to: