- 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