 |
|
| for disabled? |
|
|
By kraton. - Posted on October 9, 2006 - 03:21:31 (#20743)
Current version when comment was posted: 2.8.6pre6 |
|
|
A text only browser is very needed by blind people and for the ones with problems reading at all.
It is all about html and css these days. Barrier free. So no extra work needed if the people use html and css correct.
|
|
| re: text-based |
|
|
By umccullough - Posted on August 31, 2006 - 12:37:06 (#20543)
Current version when comment was posted: 2.8.6 dev17 |
|
|
>The problem is that almost nobody uses real HTML anymore, I don't like that at all, but that's just the way it is.
They don't because nobody forces them to. I find quite a few sites do provide accessibility to non-modern browsers. Maybe not your commercial for-profit style sites that cater to the masses, but those that are there for information's sake are still quite usable.
>Many rather modern browsers cannot even show all things hidden in a webpage. This is not only the "pretty background" as you mention, but also important information or buttons to send something. When a browser don't show these items one cannot this options and therefore it is useless, at least to me.
Try turning off javascript in your browser - that is probably the single most-abused technology that enables website developers to ignore older browsers.
>Ask me if I would prefer any web designer should stick to plain HTML, YES I do.
>But that is not the case, therefore I need a browser that is capable showing all other possibilities too.
And it won't be the case as long as users continue to allow it. Using Firefox over IE for example, makes the statement that you don't appreciate the use of ActiveX in web pages, and you refuse to accept that content. Granted, Firefox caters to ill-mannered websites as well, for the sake of compatibility.
I have found text browsers like links/lynx to be quite useful when in ssh sessions, or even setting up gentoo linux, etc. - as it allows you to access website content even without a functioning GUI.
|
|
| text-based |
|
|
By edmundf - Posted on August 31, 2006 - 07:10:55 (#20542)
Current version when comment was posted: 2.8.6 dev17 |
|
|
> I must not be understanding your premise. Are you
> saying that the way a website looks in a browser is > more important that the content it provides?
Well maybe but it is not what I had in mind.
> I see a huge amount of HTML-based content which is
> not meant to be visually-pleasing, but rather just a > hyper-text based form of documentation with
> formatting. This is what text-based browsers are
> good at.
> Maybe it's like saying that there's no reason to use > a text-based email reader - because it can't show
> the pretty background pictures that 10% of windows
> users put in their emails.
> The HTML standard was defined to be usable for
> visually-impared and text-only browsers - why would > you then discount those same browsers as useless?
The problem is that almost nobody uses real HTML anymore, I don't like that at all, but that's just the way it is. Many rather modern browsers cannot even show all things hidden in a webpage. This is not only the "pretty background" as you mention, but also important information or buttons to send something. When a browser don't show these items one cannot this options and therefore it is useless, at least to me.
Ask me if I would prefer any web designer should stick to plain HTML, YES I do.
But that is not the case, therefore I need a browser that is capable showing all other possibilities too.
|
|
| re: text-based |
|
|
By umccullough - Posted on August 30, 2006 - 13:08:22 (#20534)
Current version when comment was posted: 2.8.6 dev17 |
|
|
I must not be understanding your premise. Are you saying that the way a website looks in a browser is more important that the content it provides?
I see a huge amount of HTML-based content which is not meant to be visually-pleasing, but rather just a hyper-text based form of documentation with formatting. This is what text-based browsers are good at.
Maybe it's like saying that there's no reason to use a text-based email reader - because it can't show the pretty background pictures that 10% of windows users put in their emails.
The HTML standard was defined to be usable for visually-impared and text-only browsers - why would you then discount those same browsers as useless?
|
|
| re: text-based |
|
|
By edmundf - Posted on August 30, 2006 - 04:32:32 (#20530)
Current version when comment was posted: 2.8.6 dev17 |
|
|
No it is like saying I don't see why anybody need a command line browser that doesn't correctly show 99.999999999 % of the websites these days.
If it would show 90 % correct and miss 10 % it still would be useless IMHO.
|
|
| re: text-based |
|
|
By umccullough - Posted on August 29, 2006 - 15:20:15 (#20525)
Current version when comment was posted: 2.8.6 dev17 |
|
|
and that's like saying you don't see why anyone would need a command-line any more these days.
|
|
| re: text-based |
|
|
By edmundf - Posted on August 29, 2006 - 11:07:45 (#20521)
Current version when comment was posted: 2.8.6 dev17 |
|
|
Thanks for this info.
I really don't see why anybody should need such
a browser nowadays.
|
|
| re: text-based |
|
|
By BeOS Mr X - Posted on August 28, 2006 - 15:21:12 (#20518)
Current version when comment was posted: 2.8.6 dev17 |
|
|
Text based browsers load webpages the fastest of any other browser.
Many of the same things can be done with a text based browser as a non-text based, such as enter info into the bebits chat box as any one else would do.
Screenshot:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Lynx-wikipedia.png
Description:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lynx_%28web_browser%29
The only time I've used a text based browser is when I was installing lunix and I didnt have screens setup yet. So, when I have the option of using a non-text based, I will!
|
|
| What is a text based web browser? |
|
|
By edmundf - Posted on August 28, 2006 - 06:58:47 (#20516)
Current version when comment was posted: 2.8.6 dev17 |
|
|
What can one do with a text based web browser?
Any screen shots?
|
|
| lynx's libz.so library dependency |
|
|
By befuddled - Posted on August 10, 2005 - 18:13:31 (#17458)
Current version when comment was posted: 2.8.5 dev16 with-ssl for dano |
|
|
After installing the lynx 2.8.6, ncurses5, and iconv packages as per the instructions in the previous talkback (thanks, Alexander!), running lynx by double-clicking it in a Tracker window produced the "Could not open "lynx" (Missing library: libz.so)" error message. Opening lynx in a Terminal also produced a "Missing library" message but didn't indicate which library was missing. So, the 'Titanic' package from BeBits has the libz.so library and installing that library file into
/boot/home/config/lib satisfies the lynx dependency. Lynx now runs fine from the Terminal.
|
|
| How to Install Lynx |
|
|
By Alexander G M Smith - Posted on January 15, 2003 - 16:38:38 (#5396)
Current version when comment was posted: 2.8.5 dev12 |
|
|
Oops, just tried the latest version, and it does need iconv. Just move the files around in a similar fashion as described in the previous talkback message.
|
|
| How to Install Lynx |
|
|
By Alexander G M Smith - Posted on January 15, 2003 - 16:21:19 (#5395)
Current version when comment was posted: 2.8.5 dev12 |
|
|
Thomas Baumgartnert asked how I installed it, here's the answer, in case other people find it useful:
Download the three files, the lynx, ncurses and iconv ones, from
http://www.na.rim.or.jp/~violinhi/onion/download_e.html
Unzip the ncurses file to a temporary directory somewhere.
Then use Tracker to move (so attributes are preserved) the "share" folder so that it becomes /boot/home/config/share/
Then move the contents of the "lib" folder into the existing /boot/home/config/lib/ folder.
Then move the contents of the "bin" folder into the existing /boot/home/config/bin/ folder.
You don't need the include directory unless you are compiling your own ncurses using programs, and you don't need the man directory unless you want the manual pages. Delete the unused folders or save them.
Now unzip the lynx archive to a temporary directory somewhere.
Move the contents of the "bin" folder to the existing /boot/home/config/bin/ folder.
Move the lynx.cfg and lynx.lss to the /boot/home/config/lib/ folder.
Then move the lib/lynx_help folder to become the /boot/home/config/lib/lynx_help/ folder.
Then edit the /boot/home/config/lib/lynx.cfg file (with StyledEdit or some other text editor) and change the HELPFILE:file://localhost/boot/home/Desktop/lynx/lib/lynx_help/lynx_help_main.html line into HELPFILE:file://localhost/boot/home/config/lib/lynx_help/lynx_help_main.html Now the "?" key will give you online help.
Throw away the remaining files, unless you are collecting man pages.
As for iconv, I haven't installed it and it seems to work OK, though I haven't tried any non-Latin character sets.
- Alex
|
|
| Nice to have Lynx working. |
|
|
By Alexander G M Smith - Posted on October 14, 2002 - 13:22:40 (#3599)
Current version when comment was posted: 2.8.5 dev8 |
|
|
Thanks for porting Lynx (and ncurses). I got it working with only a bit of work, mostly figuring out where each directory would go. I also had to edit the lynx.cfg file to put in the path to the help file (different than what you were using). Works nicely, and in colour!
- Alex
|
|
|
|
|
