- From: Tab Atkins Jr. <jackalmage@gmail.com>
- Date: Mon, 20 Oct 2008 08:10:32 -0500
On Mon, Oct 20, 2008 at 7:32 AM, Julian Reschke <julian.reschke at gmx.de>wrote: > H?kon Wium Lie wrote: > >> I'd like to have a simple way of using <button> along with <a> to >> create pretty links. This markup works in Opera, Mozilla, and Webkit: >> >> <a href="http://www.w3.org/"><button>W3C</button></a> >> >> but it's not valid HTML5 it seems. I propose to make it valid. >> >> The inverse (a inside button) only works in Webkit. >> ... >> > > So a link that looks like a button? Maybe I'm missing something, but why > would you ever want that? > > Users are trained that there's a difference between following links and > pressing buttons, so it seems to be a bad idea to blur that distinction. > > Of course, buttons that look like links are a much bigger problem. > > BR, Julian > Not really. To a user, a button just means "press this to go to another page, possibly also submitting a form". We're well trained to accept buttons as plain links, though - just look at how many navs are styled in a button-like manner. Even within the context of "press a button to do something with a form", it's reasonable to want your buttons and links styled the same. Say you have a Submit and a Cancel button. Submit would post the form, while Cancel would just be a bare link out to some other page. In this case, you want both to have similar looks so as to present a cohesive UI. (I have no particular opinion on Hakon's proposal, though. I get around this by never using plain <button>s - mine are always styled in such a way that links can copy.) ~TJ -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://lists.whatwg.org/pipermail/whatwg-whatwg.org/attachments/20081020/30d0094d/attachment.htm>
Received on Monday, 20 October 2008 06:10:32 UTC