- From: Joe Clark <joeclark@joeclark.org>
- Date: Sun, 16 Mar 2003 15:51:43 -0500
- To: WAI-IG <w3c-wai-ig@w3.org>
- Cc: david@djwhome.demon.co.uk
>>That's really very amusing. Can you give us five examples of >>pages-- even single pages-- where the stylesheet declarations for >>the <a> > >That's not what I was saying. What I'm saying is that they like >changing the design so that if one tells one's elderly relative to >look for blue underlined text, they will completely miss the links. One's elderly relative will have to get used to the unchangeable reality that there are many ways to specify a hyperlink. The logical extension of the complaint above is that the <a> element should not be stylable under CSS, and that states like :hover, :visited, :active, and their combinations should be deleted from the spec. >It would take me a while to find the article, but I once picked a >page on a relatively conventional e-commerce site that was most of >the way to having five different paradigms for links on one page. >Finding pages that don't try to restyle links is more difficult than >finding ones that do. Because there are good reasons to do it. * Top and left-hand navigation is full almost to the brim with links. We know they're links. We don't need them blue and underlined. * Logos, photos, and other images do not need blue borders to distinguish themselves as links. * Body copy *can* use text-decoration: underline or similar "classic" link decoration. Cf. <http://www.contenu.nu/article.htm?id=1217>. I would note that the aforesaid :hover, :visited, and :active styles are useful in graphical browsers, and often very nice. Screen-reader users, for example, can often select by link, move by link, or extract links. Even unadorned browsers often permit tabbing from link to link, so mobility-impaired people with no adaptive technology never are at a loss for what is and is not a link. (Indeed, skipping links becomes the issue.) >Regular web users completely underestimate the amount of knowledge >about design conventions that is needed to work out how to use a web >page without waving the mouse around looking for links to appear on >the status line. That's exactly how people have to do it-- *at first*. (And, on occasional sites, everyone does it even many years after they get online.) Novice users don't stay that way forever, and we shouldn't upset defensible design conventions merely because a new medium is confusing the first few times you use it. Of course it's gonna be. -- Joe Clark | joeclark@joeclark.org Accessibility <http://joeclark.org/access/> Weblogs and articles <http://joeclark.org/weblogs/> <http://joeclark.org/writing/> | <http://fawny.org/>
Received on Sunday, 16 March 2003 16:00:19 UTC