Re: It's rubbish!

IWETHEY v. 0.3.0 | TODO

1,095 registered users | 0 active users | 1 LpH | Statistics
Login | Create New User

Welcome to IWETHEY!

Post #107,475

by deSitter

6/27/03 8:34:24 AM

Re: It's rubbish!

"Underline.."

NO!!

-drl

Post #107,506

by pwhysall

6/27/03 10:21:48 AM

Re: It's rubbish!

YES!

And the LORD sayeth unto thee, UNDERLINE THY HYPERLINKS OR DIE.

Post #107,507

by deSitter

6/27/03 10:22:42 AM

Shouldn't it be left as a browser config issue?

-drl

Post #107,510

by pwhysall

6/27/03 10:29:43 AM

Re: Shouldn't it be left as a browser config issue?

No. Users need a consistent visual cue that informs the user this here text is a hyperlink or not [link|http://news.bbc.co.uk|regular text].

We underline our links to provide that cue.

Post #107,541

by Andrew Grygus

6/27/03 12:02:15 PM

Umm . .

. . that's what color is for. I absolutely DESPISE underlined links. Do NOT underline.

[link|http://www.aaxnet.com|AAx]

Post #107,570

by cforde

6/27/03 3:50:40 PM

that is what colour is for

and when you mouse over a link the text does become underlined.

Have fun,
Carl Forde

Post #107,574

by admin

6/27/03 3:56:27 PM

Point being:

Don't specify it in the HTML. Leave it up to the user and their browser settings.

Regards,

-scott anderson

"Welcome to Rivendell, Mr. Anderson..."

Post #107,667

by pwhysall

6/28/03 2:09:55 AM

Yay colourblindness!

and displays that don't have colour!

Fuck accessibility!

Post #107,668

by Andrew Grygus

6/28/03 2:14:42 AM

Those that can't see color . .

. . can set their browser to underline links. Browsers can do that you know. I can see color and I don't want underlined links.

[link|http://www.aaxnet.com|AAx]

Post #107,702

by altmann

6/28/03 2:29:55 PM

Then set your brower to not underline links.

Browsers can do that you know.

--
Chris Altmann

Post #107,707

by folkert

6/28/03 3:17:11 PM

But if the HTML/CSS

say it is underlined... it will be.

Sort of like [link|http://z.iwethey.org/forums/render/board/show?boardid=1|THIS ONE]

But not like [link|http://z.iwethey.org/forums/render/board/show?boardid=1|THIS ONE]

See the diff?

[link\|mailto:greg@gregfolkert.net\|greg] - IT Grand-Master for Anti-President
[link\|http://www.iwethey.org/ed_curry/\|REMEMBER ED CURRY!]

THEY ARE WATCHING YOU.
The time has come for you to take the last step.
You must love THEM.
It is not enough to obey THEM.
You must love THEM.

PEACE BEGETS WAR, SLAVERY IS FREEDOM, STRENGTH IN IGNORANCE.

Post #107,711

by altmann

6/28/03 3:47:54 PM

Understood

Then it shouldn't be hardcoded as underlined (or non-underlined) in the CSS. Let the user decide. Most are going to have underlines by default.

--
Chris Altmann

Post #108,221

by jb4

7/2/03 1:46:00 PM

Exactly!

Peter was just having a fit of I-know-better-than-you-itis. (Runs rampant in a certain area of Washington State...).

I hope he's better now....

jb4
"We continue to live in a world where all our know-how is locked into binary files in an unknown format. If our documents are our corporate memory, Microsoft still has us all condemned to Alzheimer's."
Simon Phipps, SUN Microsystems

Post #107,713

by Andrew Grygus

6/28/03 3:49:36 PM

The browser can't turn underlines off . .

. . if the Web designer has specified underlines under links. If the Web designer has not, the browser may underline or not underline at the user's discression.

A Web site that specs all links underlined violates good HTML practice, which is supposed to give the viewer maximum flexibility in page layout and appearance.

[link|http://www.aaxnet.com|AAx]

Post #107,715

by altmann

6/28/03 3:54:50 PM

6/28/03 3:58:59 PM

Agreed

I guess it was unclear (to me) that you were arguing that it should be left open to the user and not that the links should explicity without underlines in the CSS.

And if I had read _all_ of the responses I would have seen that this point was [link|http://z.iwethey.org/forums/render/content/show?contentid=107574|already covered] :)

--
Chris Altmann

Edited by altmann June 28, 2003, 03:58:59 PM EDT

Expand All History

Post #107,725

by kmself

6/28/03 7:12:29 PM

Bollux

A proper browser [link|http://twiki.iwethey.org/Main/UserContentCSS|can pretty much do anything you want it to with the page].

--\r\n Karsten M. Self [link|mailto:kmself@ix.netcom.com|kmself@ix.netcom.com]\r\n [link|http://kmself.home.netcom.com/|http://kmself.home.netcom.com/]\r\n What part of "gestalt" don't you understand?\r\n [link|http://twiki.iwethey.org/twiki/bin/view/Main/|TWikIWETHEY] -- an experiment in collective intelligence. Stupidity. Whatever.\r\n \r\n Keep software free. Oppose the CBDTPA. Kill S.2048 dead.\r\n[link|http://www.eff.org/alerts/20020322_eff_cbdtpa_alert.html|http://www.eff.org/alerts/20020322_eff_cbdtpa_alert.html]\r\n

Post #107,746

by Andrew Grygus

6/28/03 11:54:23 PM

Oh sure . .

. . so I'm supposed to blow a whole lot of hours I could be billing at $90 and higher to become an expert in cascading style sheets just so I can have links displayed the way they should have been in the first place if some hot-shot Web designer hadn't decided everyone is going to have underlined links whether they like it or not. Shooting the Web designer makes more sense.

[link|http://www.aaxnet.com|AAx]

Post #107,756

by kmself

6/29/03 1:09:11 AM

Re: Oh sure . .

\r\nso I'm supposed to blow a whole lot of hours I could be billing at $90 and higher\r\n

\r\n\r\n

That's one option.

\r\n\r\n

OTOH, one reason I created that page was so that I could post stylesheets where which fix commonly cited problems with websites. In my case, font size crap. Though if you'll look at the provided stylesheet, you'll find it's extensively commented. Including some handling of anchors, default, hover, and click styles defined. If there's something missing you'd like added, drop a line.

\r\n\r\n

I forgot to add the [link|http://kmself.home.netcom.com/Download/test.html|before] and [link|http://kmself.home.netcom.com/Download/test-css.html|after] links there, I'll add those, meantime, peek at what I just provided.

Post #108,223

by jb4

7/2/03 1:47:39 PM

And would be much more satisfying, to boot!

Post #107,553

by tseliot

6/27/03 12:41:10 PM

Nice as a default rule.

But rules are made to be broken. When they're broken without regard for the effect on the overall design, then feel free to trot out the censure. When they are broken by capable designers, then you can go stick your legalistic view of web page design in a pig.

Many fears are born of stupidity and ignorance -
Which you should be feeding with rumour and generalisation.
BOfH, 2002 "Episode" 10

Post #107,572

by admin

6/27/03 3:55:23 PM

Shouldn't be specified one way or the other.

There is a browser setting for it. Use it.

But don't force it one way or the other through HTML. Capable designer or not.

Regards,

-scott anderson

"Welcome to Rivendell, Mr. Anderson..."

Post #108,220

by jb4

7/2/03 1:42:23 PM

Uhhh, Peter....

Who died and appointed you Lord of All Things Visual on the Web?

I'll decide what constitutes a "constant visual cue" for my browser when I go surfing the web, thankyewveryfuckingmuch! I don't need you or any-bloody-one-fucking-else making the decision for me as to what I need to determine a link. Just give me the option in my browser, the get the fuck out of my way, goddammit!

critique my web site - (cforde) - (54) - June 27, 2003, 03:14:07 AM EDT

Mozilla 1.3b 1024x768 - (Andrew Grygus) - (1) - June 27, 2003, 03:36:02 AM EDT

good suggestions - thank you -NT - (cforde) - June 27, 2003, 03:55:44 PM EDT

Opera 6 at 1280. - (static) - (4) - June 27, 2003, 07:07:50 AM EDT

same under Phoenix 0.5 @ 1280 - (SpiceWare) - June 27, 2003, 09:26:25 AM EDT

Re: Opera 6 at 1280. - (cforde) - (2) - June 27, 2003, 03:57:48 PM EDT

Ah... - (static) - (1) - June 27, 2003, 10:25:34 PM EDT

what works - (cforde) - June 30, 2003, 02:03:57 AM EDT

Opera 6 at 1280. - (static) - June 27, 2003, 07:09:13 AM EDT

It's rubbish! - (pwhysall) - (24) - June 27, 2003, 07:11:05 AM EDT

Re: It's rubbish! - (deSitter) - (21) - June 27, 2003, 08:34:24 AM EDT

Re: It's rubbish! - (pwhysall) - (20) - June 27, 2003, 10:21:48 AM EDT

Shouldn't it be left as a browser config issue? -NT - (deSitter) - (19) - June 27, 2003, 10:22:42 AM EDT

Re: Shouldn't it be left as a browser config issue? - (pwhysall) - (18) - June 27, 2003, 10:29:43 AM EDT

Umm . . - (Andrew Grygus) - (14) - June 27, 2003, 12:02:15 PM EDT

that is what colour is for - (cforde) - (1) - June 27, 2003, 03:50:40 PM EDT

Point being: - (admin) - June 27, 2003, 03:56:27 PM EDT

Yay colourblindness! - (pwhysall) - (11) - June 28, 2003, 02:09:55 AM EDT

Those that can't see color . . - (Andrew Grygus) - (10) - June 28, 2003, 02:14:42 AM EDT

Then set your brower to not underline links. - (altmann) - (9) - June 28, 2003, 02:29:55 PM EDT

But if the HTML/CSS - (folkert) - (2) - June 28, 2003, 03:17:11 PM EDT

Understood - (altmann) - (1) - June 28, 2003, 03:47:54 PM EDT

Exactly! - (jb4) - July 2, 2003, 01:46:00 PM EDT

The browser can't turn underlines off . . - (Andrew Grygus) - (5) - June 28, 2003, 03:49:36 PM EDT

Agreed - (altmann) - June 28, 2003, 03:58:59 PM EDT

Bollux - (kmself) - (3) - June 28, 2003, 07:12:29 PM EDT

Oh sure . . - (Andrew Grygus) - (2) - June 28, 2003, 11:54:23 PM EDT

Re: Oh sure . . - (kmself) - June 29, 2003, 01:09:11 AM EDT

And would be much more satisfying, to boot! -NT - (jb4) - July 2, 2003, 01:47:39 PM EDT

Nice as a default rule. - (tseliot) - June 27, 2003, 12:41:10 PM EDT

Shouldn't be specified one way or the other. - (admin) - June 27, 2003, 03:55:23 PM EDT

Uhhh, Peter.... - (jb4) - July 2, 2003, 01:42:23 PM EDT

high-res monitors - (cforde) - (1) - June 27, 2003, 04:02:40 PM EDT

Let the user decide if it is easy to read. - (admin) - June 27, 2003, 04:05:12 PM EDT

Fine - nice and minimal, tasteful layout - (deSitter) - June 27, 2003, 08:38:52 AM EDT

Couple things - (Silverlock) - (13) - June 27, 2003, 09:58:32 AM EDT

the warranty logo - (cforde) - June 27, 2003, 03:53:43 PM EDT

back at the ranch - (cforde) - (11) - June 30, 2003, 01:37:05 AM EDT

I don't think I want to know - (Silverlock) - (10) - June 30, 2003, 09:12:22 AM EDT

"Back at the farm", "the range", "the spread"... :-) -NT - (CRConrad) - (9) - June 30, 2003, 09:15:47 AM EDT

OK, but I know it as something *used* on a farm - (Silverlock) - (8) - June 30, 2003, 10:30:36 AM EDT

Or, "honey wagon" in Germany. :) -NT - (a6l6e6x) - June 30, 2003, 11:48:34 AM EDT

Did you have any reason to think I didn't know that...? - (CRConrad) - (6) - June 30, 2003, 02:16:44 PM EDT

Huh. I always assumed you were raised by sailors... -NT - (tseliot) - (1) - June 30, 2003, 02:32:08 PM EDT

... I was thinking Vikings or pirates or something... :-) -NT - (Another Scott) - July 1, 2003, 12:15:52 PM EDT

Re: Did you have any reason to think I didn't know that...? - (deSitter) - (1) - June 30, 2003, 02:36:57 PM EDT

Jawohl. (I cheated, can't for the life of me... - (CRConrad) - June 30, 2003, 02:56:08 PM EDT

Not really - (Silverlock) - (1) - June 30, 2003, 03:22:31 PM EDT

Heh! :-) -NT - (CRConrad) - June 30, 2003, 03:56:13 PM EDT

Fine on my Mac - Safari 1.0 @ 1024x768. Like it! -NT - (Meerkat) - June 27, 2003, 10:03:04 AM EDT

Looks nice, formatted well, but... - (folkert) - June 27, 2003, 10:58:23 AM EDT

Safari 1152x768 - (tjsinclair) - June 27, 2003, 02:23:20 PM EDT

Re: critique my web site - (Ashton) - (1) - June 27, 2003, 03:48:53 PM EDT

photo - (cforde) - June 30, 2003, 03:35:45 AM EDT

Decent - (broomberg) - June 27, 2003, 07:21:55 PM EDT

iwethey.org

Well, from then on, we had a whale of a time. I took her to dinner, I took her to dance. I bought her a bouquet of flounders. And then I went home with her. And what did I get for my trouble? A case of the clams.
161 ms