- From: Jim Ley <jim@jibbering.com>
- Date: Wed, 10 Oct 2001 00:12:12 +0100
- To: <w3c-wai-ig@w3.org>
Danny Ayers: > The meaning of 'click here' is well known to any regular browser of the web > irrespective of their tools, and new or old users with a mouse should have > no trouble with the terminology. It may well be (briefly) unfortunate to new > users of hypertext that don't have a device without an associated 'click' > feature, but the use of a generally familiar term will improve > accessibility. I agree that few people are likely to be significantly confused by click here, if it's in the context of the page. However there are a number of scenarios where it doesn't help. Link lists as discussed. Robots - Non human user agents [1] would have great difficulty understanding from context what the link pointed to, especially if it pointed to a resource it couldn't pass as is common in "[click here] to download." with the filename just MM_0_2.tgz, there's nothing the robot can infer (especially where there are more than one on the page.) [2] Different linearisations. links using "click here" or similar are often laid out in tables and such like, such that it's not always easy to realise which goes with which when the linearised differently to how the designer imagines, this problem whilst really a problem outside the links, it would be so much less of an issue if the link text was meaningful on its own, the confusion would disappear. > But in any case, aren't there (at least) two pieces of information here to > deal with : the linked text itself and the alt info? A does not have ALT, TTITLE maybe, I'm still confused why "click here" would be preferable than what would be put in the title (click here in the title can't be right by definition can it?) >I don't personally think the argument regarding the > unsuitability of 'click me' for link listing agents holds water as a general > case - isn't it is up to the designers of the agents to make them more > accessible? (for example, including in the listing the title of the linked > page). There's lots in the guidelines that pander (rightly) to what is available today, also of course as above, the link is not always a resource that a robot can get information about. Primarily I can see a number of areas where accessibility is improved by discouraging click here, and having meaningful link text, and there's no-one I can see that suffers, if we can easily deliver usability and accessibility improvements where no-one suffers should we not encourage it? Jim. [1] Robots obviously improve accessibility, for all. [2] Google already places considerable weight to the contents of the link text in ratings.
Received on Tuesday, 9 October 2001 19:13:04 UTC