Re: LYNX-DEV JavaScript Update

[Laura Eaves]

> From: Barry Rountree <address@hidden>
> Date: Fri, 19 Sep 1997 14:56:13 -0400 (EDT)
>...
> That's where I am and that's where it's heading.  And now, a few
> questions:
>
> 1)  What are the useful websites that are using JS?  (I'd like to get a
> feel for which libraries being used and how often.)

The following site just switched to mostly JS:
        http://www.netmarket.com/sa/pages/home
This will get you to a "non-standard browser" page.
Select link 1 to proceed to a page full of FRAMEs.
Select the frame called "body".
After accepting a cookie you will be on a page with many
links to javascript URLs.
Of course, lynx complains they are badly formed URLs if
you try to select one.
Have fun.

> 2)  As HTML authors, if JS was suddenly and magically available in lynx,
> what classes of commands would you use?

Generally the part you don't implement is the part someone
somewhere will most want to use.

> 3)  [Flame here]  Does lynx really need JS anyway?

Is this flame from you?
If it's not too hard to implement, it would be nice...
But I'm still not familiar with the lanaguage and so don't know
what it's good for.  For visually impaired persons using a screen reader,
I would think a ticking clock in the corner would be a nuisance.
But putting up the ticking clock is still better than not rendering the
page at all.
So what else is JS good for?
(I have access to a JS book but haven't had time to read very far in it.)

> Not that I'm going to give up and get another Theater degree if everyone
> answers "NO", but I have been giving some serious thought to this.  My
> interpreter has a footprint of 60KB compared to a 3MB build of lynx.
> That's 2% of the total size, and the interpreter will have to grow a lot
> more before it's useful.  Now, how many *useful* websites actually use it?
> How many lynx users even see a website with JS?  

The webmaster at the website above seems to think JS is "cutting edge"
technology.  I've only run into this one site, but if enough
people take that view, the number may grow.

> Certainly I think this should be geared to a compile-time option, which
> may be the ideal solution anyway.  If you want JS, Perl, or even a C
> interpreter (yikes!), just set the switches and you'll be off and running.
> This is far in the future, and I've really been jabbering quite a while
> here...

If Netscape and IE don't interpret perl/C/whatever, why put it in lynx?
-- This would be a bad idea, not just for size/complexity but also security.

Good luck.
--le

;
; To UNSUBSCRIBE:  Send a mail message to address@hidden
;                  with "unsubscribe lynx-dev" (without the
;                  quotation marks) on a line by itself.
;