[Top][All Lists]

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

Re: [Lynx-dev]

From: Krzysztof Żelechowski
Subject: Re: [Lynx-dev]
Date: Sun, 27 Nov 2011 19:26:37 +0100
User-agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux i686; rv:7.0.1) Gecko/20110929 Firefox/7.0.1 SeaMonkey/2.4.1

Użytkownik Thomas Dickey napisał:
On Sun, Nov 27, 2011 at 07:10:27PM +0100, Krzysztof Żelechowski wrote:
I think javascript is a different responsibility from stylesheets, since
the publisher must cater to browsers that do not play javascript, and
HTML contains specific provisions for that case.  Or do you consider it
to be the publisher’s fault to give me text/xml?  But how do you decide
whether to serve XML or HTML, if the latter possibility exists on
server?  Whitelisting?  Blacklisting?  Accept header?  But does Lynx
communicate that it does not accept text/xml?
As I recall it, the choice is made on the server without providing for
clients which do not implement the feature.  Lynx is only displaying
HTML as-is.
Do you refer to any server, or WebSVN in particular? Because it obviously need not be so, and, given the proper request headers are provided, it would be a bug in the server script. My question, how you prescribe serving XML to Lynx should be implemented on server, remains open.

(some page authors express similar opinions about clients that don't implement
flash ;-)

XML, XML stylesheets and the method of serving them to the client is a WWW standard while flash is only a "de-facto" proprietary standard, with a single implementation available for some 32-bit architectures only, so the difference is obvious.


reply via email to

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