W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-style@w3.org > July 2001

RE: activel inks?

From: Manos Batsis <m.batsis@bsnet.gr>
Date: Tue, 3 Jul 2001 16:19:23 +0300
Message-ID: <A35E2040C17F0C48B941B8F4D0DF122908E2C8@ermhs.Athens.BrokerSystems.gr>
To: "AMollah" <am@freephone.fsnet.co.uk>
Cc: <www-style@w3.org>


> -----Original Message-----
> From: AMollah [mailto:am@freephone.fsnet.co.uk]

> but I see that the same problem would apply in that when the 
> mouse is moved
> over the "current" link the colour would change and the 
> underline would reappear. 

Exactly :-)


>  I don't know what the answer is but this issue 
> also affects the
> :visited pseudoclass too though I think, so your points 1 to 
> 3 should apply
> to that also, using the same logic (maybe even :link if you 
> think about it -

Um... I don't really think so. A visited link is still a destination
outside the current document so :hover effects should apply to indicate
that.


>  My intention with using the 
> colours above is
> that people aren't attracted to click the "current" link 
> because they know
> this is the page they are on already, so they wouldn't hover 
> over it anyway.

Sorry, I have to disagree. Usually, links are very close together,
forming 'navigation panels/areas' in web page design. In short, I
usually hover above 3 or 4 links before clicking the one I want. So, it
is easy for non technical people to get confused.



> You are absolutely correct about blurry nature of the 
> discussion of the
> :external links issue, I think that is why I think this would 
> be better as a
> html element.


href is just an href. If you are thinking of adding linktype='external'
or something in the <a> tag, it is still better to use css classes to
style the links indicating they lead outside the current domain.



> html. Any urls
> outside subdomains might be OK, so in your example the second 
> url would be
> external. This would at least account for all the different 
> .tripod (and
> similar free isp) sites, but might cause some large corporate 
> sites some
> trouble (although alot have distinctly different sections in 
> subdomains) and
> there would still be the problem with ISPs that use just 
> directories for
> different sites.


As you can see, it is difficult to make something that will suit
everyone. I still think that letting developers make a solution of their
own, may it be css classes, or scripting, or behaviors, or whatever is
ok. That way spec editors will have more answers ready when they'll try
to make something to include in the css spec by gathering input.
OR we can make something like

:sub-domain

:super-domain

And the problems begin. If you think that the presentational overlap
between :hover and :current is a problem, wait till you see the above in
action. Example of problematic style selector authoring:

a{
font-weight:normal
color:blue;
}

a:current{
font-weight:bold;
color:black;
}

a:hover{
color:red;
font-weight : bold;
}

a:visited{
color : #c0c0c0;
}

a:sup-domain{
color : red;
font-weight:bold;
}

a:sub-domain{
color : blue;
font-weight:bold;
}


Ok. We try solving the problem with :hover and :current adding something
like the following attribute:

a:current{
hover-effect:false;
/* OR */
hover-effect:true;
}

Something more difficult now. How about :external that are also :visited
?

Um... I got no time for this right now, it may take a while and that
deadline is knocking my door but you get my point.
What do you think?

Kindest regards,

Manos
Received on Tuesday, 3 July 2001 09:20:38 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 27 April 2009 13:54:10 GMT