In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
David Woolley writes:
> > either a radical redesign or something extraordinarily clever. I think
> > it's possible to replace Lynx's internal idea of the page with Javascript
> > objects that represent the page. It's a lot of work, but you get almost
>
> They are not really Javascript objects, they are browser object model
> objects and there are at least two subtly different object models:
You're talking about something different. I'm talking about the internal
structures that describe the page, not the external structure exposed to
any scripting on the page.
For example, instead of using a whole bunch of structures and lists to
represent a form and it's input elements, Lynxzilla[1] would create the
Form() object, and then populate it with Input() objects. Purely for
ease of handling, nothing to do with exposing them to Javascript on the
page -- in fact, this would happen even if you didn't have Javascript
enabled.
> Proper support also requires a much greater awareness of frames and
> the ability to maintain multiple frames and windows simultaneously.
Which is why Lynx isn't going to get much more than basic Javascript support.
> This is even without any graphics. For IE, it requires the ability
> to incrementally restructure the page layout.
We could do that if we held the parse tree as Javascript objects or
a linked list instead of the fixed-as-text chunk we do now.
--
rob partington % [EMAIL PROTECTED] % http://lynx.browser.org/
