Re: LYNX-DEV Year 2000 Compliance

[Nelson Henry Eric]

> > Thanks to Tom and Bela, we now know it is not compliant.
> 
> I'm not sure I would say that.

Thanks for the clarification.

[...]
> types, etc.  My suggestions were intended to make Lynx more robust when
> dealing with Y2K problems in *those* programs.
[...]

If the consensus does end up putting a new file in the top directory of
the distribution, then perhaps a synopsis of Fote's, Tom's (Dickey) and
your analysis of the situation should be in there.  Between the three,
it should be unequivocal that Lynx is compliant (or not), and what problems
Lynx might encounter in relation to non-compliant software.

__Henry