1–6 of 6 posts
Please, take a look at this video [01:03]: http://www.screencast.com/t/Z1oGwRVq5ZhB
What do you think? Do we need a tool like that?
Prototype: http://kolbasov.github.com/frosty Project: https://github.com/kolbasov/frosty
But such things exists. I just wanted to ask whether you knew about Lynx, which meets this description:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lynx_(web_browser)
There's also wget, which does this too, but isn't interactive in the way that Lynx is:
> Yes, command line on the web ... What do you think? Do we need a tool like that? But such things exists. I just wanted to ask whether you knew about Lynx, which meets this description: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lynx_(web_browser) There's also wget, which does this too, but isn't interactive in the way that Lynx is: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wget
> Yes, command line on the web ... What do you think? Do we need a tool like that? But such things exists. I just wanted to ask whether you knew about Lynx, which meets this description: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lynx_(web_browser) There's also wget, which does this too, but isn't interactive in the way that Lynx is: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wget
Yes, I know about Lynx. It's good, but just one tool. What I want from web command line is to be a set of tools: Lynx + wget + instagram client + twitter + etc.
As I was preparing my reply, I was surprised to see that Lynx wouldn't function with my own website, but worked fine with Google. It turns out that Google knows how to negotiate with a text-only Web client, but it seems that's increasingly rare in modern times.
Too bad -- it speaks to the ascendance of content-heavy sites in modern times, and relatively inflexible server configurations, including my own.
> Yes, command line on the web ... What do you think? Do we need a tool like that? But such things exists. I just wanted to ask whether you knew about Lynx, which meets this description: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lynx_(web_browser) There's also wget, which does this too, but isn't interactive in the way that Lynx is: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wget
Yes, I know about Lynx. It's good, but just one tool. What I want from web command line is to be a set of tools: Lynx + wget + instagram client + twitter + etc.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Yes, I know about Lynx. It's good, but just one tool. What I want from web command line is to be a set of tools: Lynx + wget + instagram client + twitter + etc.
Okay, fair enough. But there's a philosophy dating back to the early Unix command-line days and still applies, that argues for a building-block approach -- many small building blocks is "better" than one block that does everything. As I was preparing my reply, I was surprised to see that Lynx wouldn't function with my own website, but worked fine with Google. It turns out that Google knows how to negotiate with a tex…
I agree. The prototype follows this philosophy. It contains a set of small modules: one module for a task.