Re: What are the problems with IDML?
On Sat, 17 Aug 1996, Steve Knoblock wrote:
> Unlike forward and back, next and previous makes navigation dependant on a
> certain class of browsers. Browsers already have too much real estate
> devoted to toolbars and these buttons would just add to that.
Browser vendor's can always find way's to make more screen real estate.
Personally I'd like the option/ability to be able to override the values
of the "Quick Link" buttons to ease navigation.
> Too many
> navigation options might confuse the average person---they have to
> understand forward and back as well as next and previous.
The buttons woudn't necessarily have to be called "Next" or "Previous".
They could be called "Next Chapter", "Previous Page", "Title Page",
"Index", "Glosssary", whatever. I think it was the HTML 3.0 draft that
said we could set any title with the TITLE atttribute (or maybe it was in 2.0?)
> Authors would have
> to maintain two sets of links (one for link enabled browsers and one for
> link aware browsers) also.
For the most part, I wouldn't mind having to maintain two sets of links.
Using the LINK tag would make one of my sites much easier to navigate
though, especially if the currently exposed "canvas" didn't have any
links on it.
> Personally, I would like to see next and previous on all browsers, for the
> simple reason that one should be able to flip pages as easily on the web as
> in a book. And I would not have to hunt around the page for buttons. It
> would reduce traffic and maintenance of graphics.
> _/ Steve Knoblock
> _/ City Gallery - History of Photography
> _/ Member: National Stereoscopic Association
----------------------- Christopher P. Josephes ----------------------------
Email | mailto:firstname.lastname@example.org
Web | http://www.winternet.com/~cpj1/