- 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