Smaller than Netscape?
I downloaded Netscape and was surprised to see that the Linux version comes
in at about 2 Mb smaller than the Win95 version :-)
Mark
specification. Tables have also been added (recently) to the standard;
frames have not. As such, it's not likely that Mosaic or Lynx will
support frames in the near future. (Tables are being added to Mosaic.
I don't know the status of tables in Lynx).
Lynx 2.5 [claims it] has tables,
On Mon, 9 Sep 1996, Christopher R. Hertel wrote:
On Sep 8, 9:27am, Bill Roman wrote:
Subject: seeking WWW browser (smaller than Netscape)
:
: I've tried Mosaic (2.7 beta), but it's rather dated (no frames, for
: one thing).
I've heard good comments about Grail (python based
If you want to view it that way, graphics were not html, they were a
Mosiac'ism.
Shaya
--
Shaya Potter
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Mon, 9 Sep 1996, Christopher R. Hertel wrote:
On Sep 8, 9:27am, Bill Roman wrote:
Subject: seeking WWW browser (smaller than Netscape)
:
: I've tried Mosaic (2.7
Marcelo Zacarias [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
) I've heard good comments about Grail (python based) but not tried
) it yet myself. Don't have the URL but a search will find it.
I like Grail. It handles many modern html aspects, such as tables,
frames, etc. There are times when it uses a lot of
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
On Mon, 9 Sep 1996, Shaya Potter wrote:
spotter
spotterIf you want to view it that way, graphics were not html,
Golden words!
spotterthey were a Mosiac'ism.
well.. then consider me a Lynx'ist.
___
Boris Beletsky [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For pgp public key,
|On Sep 8, 9:27am, Bill Roman wrote:
| Subject: seeking WWW browser (smaller than Netscape)
|:
|: I've tried Mosaic (2.7 beta), but it's rather dated (no frames, for
|: one thing).
|
|Frames are *not* HTML. They are a Netscape-ism. For information on
|the current draft version of the HTML
MZ == Marcelo Zacarias [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
MZ I've heard good comments about Grail (python based) but not tried
MZ it yet myself. Don't have the URL but a search will find it.
Grail really is pretty good. IIRC, it also ate up over 10 megs of
memory when I tested it.
--
Juri
On Sep 9, 7:50pm, Shaya Potter wrote:
Subject: Re: seeking WWW browser (smaller than Netscape)
:
: If you want to view it that way, graphics were not html, they were a
: Mosiac'ism.
I don't know the history of it, but I'll take your word. In any case,
minimal support for inline graphics
don't forget amaya, w3c's replacement for arena. (Then again, if I
want *information* I use lynx or emacs w3. emacs w3 is often more
convenient in conjunction with gnus and All Things Emacs; lynx is a
lot faster and easy for standalone use... and it's a rather nice ftp
client :-)
On Sep 8, 9:27am, Bill Roman wrote:
Subject: seeking WWW browser (smaller than Netscape)
:
: I've tried Mosaic (2.7 beta), but it's rather dated (no frames, for
: one thing).
Frames are *not* HTML. They are a Netscape-ism. For information on
the current draft version of the HTML specification
I refuse to believe that it takes a 4.5 MB executable (no, it's not
statically linked) to have a useful X web browser.
I've tried Mosaic (2.7 beta), but it's rather dated (no frames, for
one thing). I also tried arena (beta-3), but it seems, well, like
there's substantial room for improvement in
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
On Sun, 8 Sep 1996, Bill Roman wrote:
romanI refuse to believe that it takes a 4.5 MB executable (no, it's not
romanstatically linked) to have a useful X web browser.
roman
romanI've tried Mosaic (2.7 beta), but it's rather dated (no frames, for
romanone
13 matches
Mail list logo
