On Tue, Feb 19, 2002 at 08:52:40AM -0800, Chuq Von Rospach wrote: > On 2/19/02 7:09 AM, "Jay R. Ashworth" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >> I was wondering how long it would be before someone brought up the case > >> for Lynx. Blind people I had not though about, although I had thought > >> about text based reverse turing tests. > > > > :-) > > Lynx access is a really gnarly issue. Lynx usage on my sites has gone from > about 4% a couple of years ago, to < 1% these days, from what I've seen. On > the other hand, Lynx is the litmus test for sight-limited access tools. If > it don't work with lynx, you lock out those with seeing problems (and with a > mother who has some macular degeneration, I'm a bit enlightened by those > issues. Thank god for Macs and the ability to make font sizes bigger...) > > While I'll happily tell the "I don't like cookies" people to get over it,
Well, actually, there are still a couple browsers that don't *do* cookies. 2.8.3, I think, doesn't do persistence, yet. I'm not sure if GoWeb does or not... > Lynx access isn't something I can or will easily blow off. And something > geeks tend not to think of, you start getting into issues of ADA compliance > issues, which is a non-trivial issue we haven't even started thinking about > here... Was thinking about that, yes. :-) > > It's the browser on my wireless handheld, and, in general, it doesn't > > handle images *at all*. Nor will the microbrowsers on some people's > > cell phones. > > Yup. And while I'd say today it's not a huge issue, 2-3 years down the road, > when the version of mailman we're currently noodging over gets into wide > usage, it'll be there, and it'll only become more endemic. If you design > stuff like this for what's Out There today, by the time it's written, it'll > be missing What's Coming... My outlook exactly. I like to try to keep people honest; it ain't easy. > >> So one solution would be to have both public and private archives. The > >> public archives have the email addresses obfuscated in some way, the > >> private archives would not. > > > > Oh. We're talking about *archives*? Silly me. I thought we were > > talking about maintainer addresses on sign-up pages. > > We're talking about both, actually. It's a floor wax and a dessert topping! You got that backwards, Chuq. :-) > > It's ASCII text. It's useful. Making it into something else makes it > > less useful, > > But it's the kind of tradeoff we have to consider -- we ARE going to have to > give up some stuff in one place to make improvements in another. You aren't > going to find a way to better protect the admins without cost in usability > somewhere. It's a no-free-lunch situation, or we would have solved it > already. The key is to understand the situation and find the most > appropriate compromise, because a solution without compromise doesn't seem > to exist. Yeah, cost-benefit analyses are hell, ain't they? The whole topic is probably going to drve us all plaid... Cheers, -- jra -- Jay R. Ashworth [EMAIL PROTECTED] Member of the Technical Staff Baylink RFC 2100 The Suncoast Freenet The Things I Think Tampa Bay, Florida http://baylink.pitas.com +1 727 647 1274 "If you don't have a dream; how're you gonna have a dream come true?" -- Captain Sensible, The Damned (from South Pacific's "Happy Talk") _______________________________________________ Mailman-Developers mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/mailman-developers
