Re: lynx-dev bug? unable to 'g' to #anything

[Vlad Harchev]

On Tue, 27 Apr 1999, Klaus Weide wrote:

> On Tue, 27 Apr 1999, Vlad Harchev wrote:
> > On Mon, 26 Apr 1999, Philip Webb wrote:
> > > 990426 Vlad Harchev wrote: 
> > > > lynx doesn't accept anchors as 'g' targets.
> > > > If you enter '#anything', it jumps to dired of current directory.
> 
> It's been behaving like that for a long time.  The question is, should it
> behave differently?  Selecting fragments by hand isn't a very common
> occurrence.

     If user knows anchor names in large file, s/he can jump to this anchor
very easy with 'g' "#anchor". Lynx before this patch reloaded document if you 
append '#anything' in the 'G' prompt.
  
> This could be seen as a special case of a more general question: should
> lynx try to resolve relative Goto URLs (presumably wrt. the currently
> loaded document)?  I think not, at least for the general case.  It would
> conflict with what it currently does, trying to guess several ways what a
> non-full-URL string might mean.

 IMO treating relative Goto URLs is useless. If user wish to go to file
 'foo.html' (relative to the current document), s/he can 'G' , remove the 
 name of current file (but leave remaining URL), and then append 'foo.html'
 - this is a staightforward way to do this.  

> Even for the '#anything' case - if you have a file named '#anything',
> 'g' '#anything' will load that file.

  It's still possible - user can 'g' "./#anything". IMO users invoke named
files in current directory very seldom ( especially files with names starting
with '#'). 

> > > you can do it by entering  G , then adding  #anchor  to the presented URL,
> > > tho' you than have to do  ^r  to get it to move to that page.
> >  
> >  Thanks. Seems that it's ugly enough - going to anchors is useful for large
> > documents, and pressing '^r' will reload them.
> 
> It shouldn't be too difficult to remove the need for the RELOAD.

  This seems reasonable too (tho' more keypresses required to 'g' to
'#anything' with approach you suggest), but volunteer is required to do this.
  I don't see any inconsistences in current state of matters (after '#foo' is
 supported).

>    Klaus
> 

 Best regards,
  -Vlad