Re: frames and lynx

[Al Gilman]

to follow up on what Stanley Valladares Smith said:

>  The impression I'm left with is that if page designers are
> considerate of lynx-and-no-graphics users, then we can cope.
> If not, there is nothing we can do about it from our end.

Lynx does not quite leave you that naked.  The "l)ist links"
function, for example, can be used to get a handle on what some
undocumented set of frames are about.  But it is very true what
you say: with a little understanding and thought from the
authors, it can be reasonably OK, and without any it can be
pretty bad.

> I suppose that on design of public facility issues, this must
> be a little bit how the handicapped must feel.

Yes, that is perceptive of you.  The parallel to the experiences
of the handicapped is even stronger when you throw in the fact
that blind web navigators are in the same boat with the Lynx user
in being dependent on the adequacy of the text to be a backbone
for orientation and navigation.

Despite all the money that has gone into the competition,
including recent explicit efforts at making GUI tools accessible,
Lynx still pulls down the top rating among web browsers for
overall usability by the blind, so far as I can tell.

-- Al Gilman