xwindows

[jwantz at hpcc2.hpcc.noaa.gov]

Hi Janina,
Hmmm, I never thought about bookmarking to get around frames--that's a 
rather cool idea.  In some cases auto-redirects do present lynx with 
problems--though normally you can follow the link.  Recently I have been 
running into streams that won't play, they are normally called something 
.clip.  Any ideas what they might be?I'm fairly sure I could find 
something that would play them if I only knew what they were.

     Jim
On Fri, 17 
May 2002, Janina Sajka wrote:

> Hi, Jim:
> 
> I don't mind the way Lynx handles frames. In fact, I rather
> prefer it on sites I visit often. I simply bookmark the
> particular frame that I'm interested in. Saves me from slogging
> through nav bars, mostly.
> 
> And, while tab and shift-tab don't take you from link to link in
> lynx, up and down arrows do exactly that.
> 
> Tables that linearize properly seem to be OK from my view in
> lynx.
> 
> And, of course, Lynx supports streaming very well.
> 
> So, what's missing? java and Javascript is pretty much it, imho.
> 
> On the other hand, IE can take an eternity to load a page. Very
> annoying. Give me lynx for speed, please.
> 
> On Fri, 17 May 2002 jwantz at hpcc2.hpcc.noaa.gov wrote:
> 
> > Hi Janina,
> > Well, Java support would be nice and it really should handle frames and 
> > tables.  I do like the ability in Internet Exploder to be able to tab 
> > and shift-tab through links.  At home though, the only thing I normally 
> > use WINDOWS for is Kurzweil 1000.  I'd guess that I spend 98% of my time 
> > on Linux.
> > 
> >      Jim Wantz WB0TFK
> > On Thu, 16 May 2002, Janina Sajka wrote:
> > 
> > > 
> > > Heav en forefiend. 
> > > 
> > > I like lynx just as it is. I would hate to think it would ever
> > > behave like Internet Explorer., That would be brain dead.
> > > 
> > > Now, one can wish for javascript support without emmulating IE.
> > > Those two are not the same thing.
> > > 
> > > On Wed, 15 May 2002 jwantz at hpcc2.hpcc.noaa.gov wrote:
> > > 
> > > > Hi,
> > > > Well, there isn't anything to prevent someone re-writing lynx in such a 
> > > > way that it would function the same as internet explorer in WINDOWS.  
> > > > Except that it would be a lot of work of course.  I agree, Internet 
> > > > Exploder will access more things than lynx.  We can only hope that 
> > > > Netscrape will work better under Gnome than it does under WINDOWS.
> > > > 
> > > >      Jim Wantz WB0TFK
> > > > On Tue, 
> > > > 14 May 2002, Cheryl Homiak wrote:
> > > > 
> > > > > Also, you have to remember that just because we have access to a gui doesn't
> > > > > mean it's going to be easy. How many times have i heard blind windowws users
> > > > > complain that they did something but can't undo it or duplicate it because
> > > > > they're not sure how they did it in the first place. Having a screen reader that
> > > > > really allows you to sort out where you are and what you are changing or are
> > > > > about to change would be vital.
> > > > > My biggest concern for linux right now isn't gui per se; my biggest concern is
> > > > > Internet accessibility. My main reason for being interested in Xwindows at all
> > > > > is the hope of being able eventually to use a browser that will allow me to
> > > > > access Internet sites that I cannot now access. I don't know if that is a
> > > > > realistic hope, but that is frankly my main concern.
> > > > > 
> > > > > 
> > > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > > Speakup mailing list
> > > > > Speakup at braille.uwo.ca
> > > > > http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup
> > > > > 
> > > > 
> > > > 
> > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > Speakup mailing list
> > > > Speakup at braille.uwo.ca
> > > > http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup
> > > > 
> > > 
> > > 
> > 
> > 
> > _______________________________________________
> > Speakup mailing list
> > Speakup at braille.uwo.ca
> > http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup
> > 
> 
>