Somewhere convenience...according to whom?
Consider that there are Lynx users accessing the browser as a part of
shell services. meaning editing the field randomly may impact others
as well.
Then there is the risk that testing options results in the site deciding
you are a hacker.
Amazon three times in the past 48 hours decided that my efforts seeking a
work around on my own triggered their detection of too many requests.
I would rather have options for the field I could choose on the fly.
On Tue, 13 Aug 2019, [email protected] wrote:
Opera has some preset values for user-agent header which one
can change on the fly, as well as allowing customization. I wouldn't
bother the developers of lynx to do that. You can keep some standard
strings available somewhere convenient, mark & transfer different ones
into the field as desired. I've dealt with every problem I've
encountered by adding stuff and removing 'lynx' (washingtonpost.com
blocks users with that in the UA header; JAMA sends them to their
mobile, hence incomplete, pages). It's their mistakes even if
lynx-users suffer. Why pick on us? Did a lynx eat their pet dog when
they were children?
russell bell
_______________________________________________
Lynx-dev mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lynx-dev
_______________________________________________
Lynx-dev mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lynx-dev
