Re: [WSG] Verb this link (WAS Click here--reference)
On 21/09/05, Blank Blank [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On 9/21/05, Lea de Groot [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I'm not on this don't use verbs boat at all because I haven't yet found (or just missed :( ) a justification for it. While I don't by default, or even often, use a verb in a link, sometimes I do. For instance, one of the pages on a current project allows you to view a video. The link is a href=trainingVideo1.wmvDownload Video Now/a, on the download page, but the links throughout the site that point to that page say similar to: You can view a a href= something.htmlvideo clip/a The difference is that one points to a page and one allows you to do something (in this case view a movie) Verbs can be very useful. I don't understand the blanket ban. At the same time, I wouldn't be terribly upset to see: You can a href=something.htmlview a video clip/a Why is this bad? warmly, Although to view a video, one technically needs to download it first (or at least a portion of it -- ie streaming), I think the real problem with using verbs in link text, is that you are assuming the user will do something, or that something is going to happen. In the video example, one may have an embedded movie player in their browser, hence I would think of this as playing a video, as opposed to downloading it. Evening viewing could be thought of as inappropriate, what if the user is blind? Although it's quite bland, something along the lines of: A a href=videovideo clip/a is available. makes more sense to me. Cheers, Daniel Nitsche I'm with Lea here. What about 'Search'? 'Browse'? Trying to do grammatical acrobatics to turn these into non-verbs is, to me, ridiculous and counter-productive. There are many many cases where a user is, in down-to-basics terms, taking an action when they follow a link. No matter whether the technical reality is that they are being presented with a static document... in straightforward user terms, it's taking an action. This is one guideline I disagree with and will not be following. ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help **
RE: [WSG] Verb this link (WAS Click here--reference)
-Original Message- From: Damian Sweeney [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, 21 September 2005 9:07 AM To: wsg@webstandardsgroup.org Subject: [WSG] Verb this link (WAS Click here--reference) This thread has got me thinking. If verbs are not the go in link text, where does that leave us with 'skip to' links at the beginning of a page? Should we just use 'main content' or 'navigation/menu'? Also, Richard. The text sounds more passive because I've put it in the passive voice. You can nominalise [1] most phrases to put them into the passive, however, this does change the emphasis, as you mentioned. If we want links to be incorporated into the flow of the language and make sense out of context then should we be constrained to a particular style of writing to achieve this? Still open minded about this, just curious what others are thinking. Seriously, in my opinion there is no logical reason why we should not be allowed to put verbs into a link. In fact, I find that demand utterly ridiculous. It's got nothing to do with accessibility and in many cases can reduce usability. Put them in if they are useful, leave them out if they are useless. ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help **
Re: [WSG] Verb this link (WAS Click here--reference)
Damian Sweeney said: where does that leave us with 'skip to' links[...] Should we just use 'main content' or 'navigation/menu'? yes, I believe you are correct Damien... I've argued this point before =) kind regards Terrence Wood ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help **
Re: [WSG] Verb this link (WAS Click here--reference)
On 9/21/05, Lea de Groot [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I'm not on this don't use verbs boat at all because I haven't yetfound (or just missed :( ) a justification for it.While I don't bydefault, or even often, use a verb in a link, sometimes I do.For instance, one of the pages on a current project allows you to view a video.The link is a href="" Video Now/a, on thedownload page, but the links throughout the site that point to thatpage say similar to:You can view a a href="" something.htmlvideo clip/aThe difference is that one points to a page and one allows you to dosomething (in this case view a movie)Verbs can be very useful. I don't understand the blanket ban. At the same time, I wouldn't be terribly upset to see:You can a href="" a video clip/aWhy is this bad?warmly, Although to view a video, one technically needs to download it first (or at least a portion of it -- ie streaming), I think the real problem with using verbs in link text, is that you are assuming the user will do something, or that something is going to happen. In the video example, one may have an embedded movie player in their browser, hence I would think of this as playing a video, as opposed to downloading it. Evening viewing could be thought of as inappropriate, what if the user is blind? Although it's quite bland, something along the lines of: A a href="" clip/a is available. makes more sense to me. Cheers, Daniel Nitsche
