> Since my intuition and the current code both prioritize the most > restrictive, rather than least restrictive, option selected, I'd really > like some other people to chime into this discussion with their > preferences. I'd rather not change pre-existing behavior of pre-existing > options if there isn't a compelling groundswell to do so.
Assuming that the restrictions are subsets of each other (i.e. nothing that passes staybelow would fail stayonhost, etc.) then I agree that the most restrictive should win. If I didn't mean staybelow, then I should not have included it. Ooh! An enhancement idea! Perhaps the "link not included" page in the viewer could include the reason if known. I don't know if that would require diddling with the plucker doc to record that reason, but it might be useful to have "link rejected by staybelow option" or "image rejected (size > 64K)" and so on. -- Anthony Veale' [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://fafnir.dyndns.org http://fafnir.dyndns.org/~veale _______________________________________________ plucker-list mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.rubberchicken.org/mailman/listinfo/plucker-list
