030529 Henry Nelson wrote: > Maybe Lynx should do what MSIE does: feed the source (temp file Lynx > has written to disk) into DEFAULT_EDITOR rather than refetch the file > or "source cache." That way there is no way to accidentally or otherwise > use data which is possibly no longer appropriate for hypertext operations.
that seems rather paranoid: let's let the user decide how secure to be. > For a long, long time source cacheing was not allowed into the code base. > It might be worthwhile to review some of the discussion that > went on prior to and at the time source cache was finally implemented. i don't remember any concerns re security, only re accuracy etc, eg "might not the source be out of date?", "won't it overload my disk?" > Seems like a large proportion of documents are created dynamically > on the web these days. In many cases it means that each page from > the server is unique, i.e., each time you access the URL, the page > that the server returns is different from any page you may have > received on previous accesses to the same URL. A cached document in > that situation perhaps needs to have it's base URL time stamped so > that its content is not confused with the constantly changing content > of the original URL. yes, that is a definite change since cacheing was introduced to Lynx. the basic reason for demanding cacheing c 1997-8 was the delay when Lynx had to go back to the site to grab the source. today with broadband, that is hardly a problem anymore. however, other browsers -- eg Galeon & Opera -- seem to cache source. my vote is to leave the basics alone, while correcting hidden bugs (if any). -- ========================,,============================================ SUPPORT ___________//___, Philip Webb : [EMAIL PROTECTED] ELECTRIC /] [] [] [] [] []| Centre for Urban & Community Studies TRANSIT `-O----------O---' University of Toronto ; To UNSUBSCRIBE: Send "unsubscribe lynx-dev" to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
