- From: Jukka Korpela <jukka.korpela@tieke.fi>
- Date: Mon, 12 Aug 2002 09:46:47 +0300
- To: w3c-wai-ig@w3.org
Lynn Alford wrote: > Does anyone have or know of a good page that explains why > "click here" is bad linking practice? This has raised an interesting discussion, but since no such page has been mentioned (unless I missed something relevant, as I tend to do). So I wrote one: http://www.cs.tut.fi/~jkorpela/www/click.html It has the following summary: * "Click here" just looks stupid. * "Click here" looks especially stupid when printed on paper. * "Click here" is useless in a list of links or when in "links reading" mode, or whenever a link text is considered as isolated from its textual and visual context. - - * "Click here" is bad food for search engines. If you say "For information on pneumonia, click here", search engines won't know that your document contains a link to a document about pneumonia. Some important search engines use the link text in estimating the relevance of a link. Using descriptive link texts thus helps users in finding documents they're interested in, potentially including your document due to a link text with some key word. * There's usually a fairly simple way to do things better. Instead of the text "For information on pneumonia, click here", you could simply write "pneumonia information". * "Click here" is device-dependent. There are several ways to follow a link, with or without a mouse. Users probably recognize what you mean, but you are still conveying the message that you think in a device-dependent way. It then presents some more detailed explanations, and it mentions a problem that "Click here" is often meant to solve: links that are not easily recognizable as links. (The correct approach is to remove the causes of that problem, rather than doing something that is supposed to alleviate its symptoms.) -- Jukka Korpela, senior adviser TIEKE Finnish Information Society Development Centre http://www.tieke.fi Phone: +358 9 4763 0397 Fax: +358 9 4763 0399
Received on Monday, 12 August 2002 02:42:29 UTC