[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Andrew M. Bishop): | A set of pre-prepared configuration files would do what you want.
Perhaps a poll would lead to more knowledge about reasonable scenarios, and provide some configuration examples which work at least basically (but not perfect)... These could be tested and improved (patched) by users, just the usual way. | I know that quite a few people want WWWOFFLE to be an archiving | program, but I am against that. I'm also not in favour of the archive thing, bcause wwwoffle has much more capabilities than that, and anyway an archive wouldn't really rock. And there's already archive.org and google and maybe more. | I will continue to make WWWOFFLE work best as a proxy that is | sometimes, not always, connected to the internet. Perhaps it would be clearer if i'd give a demonstration of what i mean with '20 years in the future'. But i can come up only with an off topic example. Imagine, creating just for fun a 'virtual world server' which reads sites from the web, transforming them into a completely different (yet consistent) context. Originally it could be just part of a multiplayer adventure, which 'simulates' realities which aren't too far from the 'real' one. Later it could become part of some 'virtual personalities' research, like <http://ritl.fsu.edu/about_pals.html>. This is SciFi now, but OTOH technology is developing rapidly. Unfortunately the same technology could be used for hidden censorship :| but then, you can use anything for wicked things. | broadband. The increasing use of portable computers may reverse this, | but semi-permanent connections (Wi-Fi) reduce the need for WWWOFFLE in | that situation. I think the real values of wwwoffle don't depend on the kind of connection, or bandwidth. Or at least they shouldn't. ° /\/
