I keep seeing (and mostly sharing) sentiments like this, but a couple of things to note: - Sets of proposed features vary (happens to both lightweight WWW and

I keep seeing (and mostly sharing) sentiments like this, but a couple of things to note: - Sets of proposed features vary (happens to both lightweight WWW and modernized Gopher proposals). I guess a more viable approach may be a less strict one than composing such a set. For instance, a search engine for such websites was mentioned in another comment here, and I keep thinking about a web directory for that, but perhaps either of those would be more useful if it was able to detect (and filter by) features required by a website, rather than a single flag saying whether it's usable with a particular set of features. - Occasionally it's suggested (in this case both in the article and in the comments) that browsers only supporting documents would help somehow. Yet there's a bunch of lightweight web browsers (even I wrote a couple), as well as combinations such as FF+noscript+uBO+Stylus, which may be nicer to use, but don't seem to affect the overall situation beyond "please enable JS" and "best viewed in IE6" messages.