Hi donothing! On Fr, 08 Apr 2011, donothing successfully wrote:
> On 8 April 2011 07:58, John Beckett <[email protected]> wrote: > […] > > whatever the merits, this is one of those situations where it > > is not worth debating about some theoretical benefit of being > > able to use vim.org without your browser deciding that it > > doesn't work, so it should try www.vim.org instead. > > If you're averse to the theoretical, what about the > practical? > > elinks 'http://vim.org/' — fails. > lynx 'http://vim.org/' — fails. > links2 'http://vim.org/' — fails. > w3m 'http://vim.org/' — fails. > wget 'http://vim.org/' — fails. > vim 'http://vim.org/' — fails! > > A user may well assume the site is down if the url doesn't > resolve. Seconded. This had bugged me many many times with various browsers. regards, Christian -- You received this message from the "vim_use" maillist. Do not top-post! Type your reply below the text you are replying to. For more information, visit http://www.vim.org/maillist.php
