On Wed, 23 Jan 2002, Preben Randhol wrote: > "Thomas E. Dickey" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote on 23/01/2002 (19:11) : > > > You're not responding to his question. (w3m doesn't do javascript > > No I didn't say it did. I just said w3m is better than lynx.
tsk, tsk (you should go back and read the paragraph to which you responded) > > > either). And the comment about screen-readers indicates that w3m and > > links would be worse choices than lynx. > > Don't know how a screen reader works, so can you please explain why it > would be worse? I've been told (more than once) that screen readers are line-oriented. They don't handle two-dimension layout of the sort that people tend to contrive when attempting to use html as a layout description. -- T.E.Dickey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> http://invisible-island.net ftp://invisible-island.net
