[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

lynx-dev LYNXfoo internal URLs (was: cfg help sought)

From: Klaus Weide
Subject: lynx-dev LYNXfoo internal URLs (was: cfg help sought)
Date: Fri, 9 Jun 2000 12:04:24 -0500 (CDT)

On Thu, 8 Jun 2000, pAb-032871 wrote:

> In "Re: lynx-dev cfg help sought"
> [08/Jun/2000 Thu 16:10:02]
> Klaus Weide wrote:
> > For a hint to a "direct route", see the end of the last section of
> > "Supported URLs" (from the main Help page).  I am referring to the
> > current version of that, your setup may point to something
> > older, so try the online help link from <>.

> Only a slight relation to the current subject, but I've always
> been curious about this:
>    Lynx uses a variety of internal URL schemes as structured stream
>    objects for communication among its display modules. If you discover
>    what they are, and are tempted to use them externally in documents,
>    find the self-restraint to resist that temptation!!!
>                               ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

You are not quoting from the current version.  There are no triple
exclamation marks in the current version.

> MacLynx may be a little too trusting, because it *does* utilize

That's possible, since it is an older version.

> these internal URL schemes when presented in external documents
> [localhost-only as far as I know: haven't had a chance to test
> these links in remote HTML].  However, the one on the server tells
> me these are special and shouldn't be used when I try to follow
> these links.

It depends on the scheme whether following them as links, or reaching
them with 'g', works or not.  Schemes that could cause some harm when
activated unexpectedly, like "LYNXDIRED:", should not "work" except
in specific situations.

> But no documentation I've found says *why* the use of LYNXfoo
> internal URLs is a bad idea.  I can think of a few reasons on
> my own:
> A)-Not all versions are trusting enough to follow these links.
> B)-Not all versions use the same internal schemes.  I have seen
>    a few web-pages containing links to LYNXSETTINGSTATUS:/ which
>    MacLynx [a v2.7.1 port] knows nothing about.
> C)-It's not valid HTML, and most browsers dislike custom URL schemes.

The newer "URL Schemes" text gives some reasons (not too far from your

> C is only relevant with public files, not things like lynx_bookmarks.html
> and so on.  I can't think of any reason to use them in public
> web-pages anyway.  Lynx already uses invalid HTML because its
> generated documents don't include DOCTYPE, 

That is not required for a text to be a valid text/html document.
HTML 2.0 is HTML, too.

> tags, but that's harmless and makes them easier to edit.

None of these are required.

Lynx uses them anyway in most of its generated HTML; I am curious
what exceptions you have found.

Bookmark files are a special case, they are nearly-but-not-quite
HTML (unclosed OL element).


; To UNSUBSCRIBE: Send "unsubscribe lynx-dev" to address@hidden

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]