- From: Tab Atkins Jr. <jackalmage@gmail.com>
- Date: Wed, 7 Apr 2010 17:45:38 -0700
On Wed, Apr 7, 2010 at 5:08 PM, Steve Dennis <admin at subcide.com> wrote: > On Thu, 8 Apr 2010, L. Ian Hickson wrote: >> >> Personally, my opinion is that images in links should have borders because > >> otherwise how do you know it's a link? >> >> This seems to be a minority view, though. People have been explicitly >> turning off this cue for literally over a decade. > > I think that browser defaults should make sense when the page is rendered > Without author styles. ?While authors often override this particular feature > , there they have the option to represent linked images in other ways such > as hover states, or more attractive borders etc. > > Authors also often overwrite many other browser defaults such as font, > styles for horizontal rules, often margins on paragraphs/headings/lists etc. > But it's probably not a good idea to set these things to zero. > > At the end of the day, I've never found turning off borders much of a hassle > as an author. As Ian said, though, borders are turned off *so often* that I don't think it's an actual cue to users. The actual cue I, and many normal people I know of, use to see if an image is a link is to put the mouse cursor over it and see if it turns into a pointer. That's still present, so we should be good. It's not ideal for mobile browsers without an explicit pointer, but I get along fine on my phone. ~TJ
Received on Wednesday, 7 April 2010 17:45:38 UTC