Re: lynx-dev Link numbering and keypad mode

[Jacob Poon]

On Tue, 16 Feb 1999, Laura Eaves wrote:

> > Date: Tue, 16 Feb 1999 07:26:32 -0600 (CST)
> > From: Klaus Weide <address@hidden>
> >...
> > > I've presented [2] as a 2- rather than 3-way toggle (currently we have
> > > hidden vs. displayed(links only) vs. displayed(links and form fields)).
> > > I think it was a mistake, at the time, to separate the last two.  It was
> > > an implementation oversight at the time that links-are-numbered was
> > > first introduced, that form fields were *not* numbered.  It should
> > > simply have been fixed by making them "first class links", i.e. changing
> > > the links-are-numbered option to always include form fields.  I'd like
> > > to see that change now.
> >
> > I disagree - form fields just aren't first class links.  Real links have
> > destinations, you can do commands on them that you can't do on form fields,
> > they make sense when LISTed, and so on.  Personally I don't find the 
> > numbering of form fields not very useful, especially for textarea lines.
> 
> Would it help to call them anchor numbers instead of link numbers?  That is 
> the
> way they are implemented.
> 
> Also, numbering form fields is extremely useful for blind and visually
> impaired users, as it obviates the need to havigate a screen
> with arrow keys while using speech, braille or screen enlargement.

I think it will be bettter to add an option to number form fields and
links independently.  For example, when using goto command, '123l' chooses
link 123, and '123f' goes to form field 123.