[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: lynx-dev syntax change - f not g

From: Philip Webb
Subject: Re: lynx-dev syntax change - f not g
Date: Tue, 2 Mar 1999 04:34:45 -0500 (EST)

990302 Klaus Weide wrote: 
> 990301 Kim DeVaughn & Laura Eaves discussed reversing  123  &  123g :
-- details snipped --
> I suggest that, if someone wants to do this,
> you not just switch the meaning of the suffixes "" and "g",
> but use a new suffix.  I suggest "f" = "follow".

a good suggestion, already made by KD:
ie for "" & "g", we would have "f" & "".
of course, in the absence of KD, LE will have to code it ... (wry grin)

> On Tue, 2 Mar 1999, Philip Webb enthused:
>> well said!  backwards compatibility has not always been observed,
>> eg when occasionally someone has decided a new spec requires a change
>> in well-established behaviour: examples omitted to avoid distraction.
> [ and more in the same vein omitted ]
not really: the remainder of the discussion covered Option possibilities.

SUPPORT     ___________//___,  Philip Webb : address@hidden
ELECTRIC   /] [] [] [] [] []|  Centre for Urban & Community Studies
TRANSIT    `-O----------O---'  University of Toronto

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]