On 5 Mar 2002, Kirk Reiser wrote:
> Well, the comments I've seen seem to indicate that one should consider
> a number of other packages including w3m, gecko and links, but not
> including lynx. Other comments would have one legally threaten or
> cajole sites into not using java script which is probably not very
> practicle.
I don't believe that any of the text-only browsers would be suitable for
converting to handle JavaScript. ('links' is no more likely than Netrix).
There's a trivial patch for w3m to handle a little (part of doc.output,
iirc), but that's a long way from deciding how to work with the events
and other non-text features. (It's enough to demo, but not enough to
use).
> I have taken a look at w3m but prefer the way lynx handles pages. Is
> it my understanding then that lynx is not suitable for modifying to
> support java script? I realize it might be a fair amount of work. Is
> it worth doing or not? I have to admit I didn't expect the suggestion
> to use someone elses package. 'grin'
--
T.E.Dickey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
http://invisible-island.net
ftp://invisible-island.net
; To UNSUBSCRIBE: Send "unsubscribe lynx-dev" to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
