Believe it or not, there are WebBrowser''''''s that run entirely in text mode. Some people even prefer TextModeBrowser''''''s.

These TextModeBrowser''''''s are open-source:
	* LynxBrowser: Well-known.  Does not understand tables and other formatting tricks.
	* LinksBrowser: does understand tables.
	* W3M (http://w3m.sourceforge.net/): Unlike Lynx it ''does'' understand tables and frames. It also lets you edit text fields in a real editor. And following links after going back in history does not destroy your history.  This one simple thing is my reason to choose w3m over links. (w3m will also display images if run in an xterm, for example.)
	* Wanna-Be (http://mindstory.com/wb2/): for MacOs.
	* curl - does not understand HTML ;)

Advantages to using a TextModeBrowser:
	* Fast (no image downloads)
	* Works over a telnet or rlogin or rsh session
	* Works if you don't have x installed

Advantages to making your web site TextModeBrowser-friendly/LynxFriendly:
	* Some people turn graphics off even when they are using a graphics-mode browser.
	* When internet bandwidth is tight, graphics get dropped.  Sometimes your user will be stuck with only the basic HTML document and whichever of the images managed to squeak through.
	* A text-mode friendly site is more usable by disabled persons (can a speech synthesizer read an image map?)
	* A text-mode friendly site is more usable by PalmOs devices.
	* If you develop for Linux, remember that much of your audience is using a text-mode browser by ''choice.''  They will scorn your site if it isn't text-mode friendly.
-----

After extensive market research (i.e. flamed consistently), I've determined that no programmers resource should be inaccessible by a TextModeBrowser, especially Lynx. Actually, site statistics still put Lynx in the top five browsers for my programmer-centric sites even today. I attribute this to Netscape's abysmal failure. Indeed, when I remade my website, I found it easier to support MSIE4+ and Lynx than Netscape. -- SunirShah

''Question: Do pocket computers (and even PervasiveComputing) require even more stringent requirements than pure Lynx support?''

Think small.  Think very small.

''Actually, as long as you don't create words/"grouped segments" that are wider than the display area of the pocket computer, Lynx compatibility should be sufficient. The rest will be word wrapped. Note that browsers that offer VT-100 rendered frames aren't sufficiently low-end to test with in this case because all you have is a purely linear rendering. --ss''

And of course, text mode browsers do not have any ''computational'' restrictions
-- they just have limited IO capabilities. On the other hand, pocket computers
do have serious computational limitations but have in general a screen
that is pixel-addressable. -- StephanHouben

----
See also AlternativeBrowsers, LynxFriendly
----
CategoryWebBrowser