I strongly recommend you disable this feature of windows on any systems
you set up for the less computer literate because I can tell you form
experience with novice users that its a very bad feature.
David Dorward wrote:
On 28 Mar 2008, at 05:48, Jixor - Stephen I wrote:
Yes but you choose to
On Mar 28, 2008, at 10:09 AM, Hassan Schroeder wrote:
Perhaps if you've never seen or used one, it's hard
to conceptualize, but they exist.
Ouch...
However if the subject is still opening new windows vis a vis the
"target" attribute, it seems to me hard to conceptualize a web app
that d
Joe Ortenzi wrote:
... The help application opens a new window because it is designed to
help you interact with the application you requested help with. It would
be pretty dumb to delete the thing that you requested help with to be
replaced with the help modal.!!
Exactly my point. And exact
On 28 Mar 2008, at 05:48, Jixor - Stephen I wrote:
Yes but you choose to do so rather than being forced to do so.
Usability tests still show that opening a new window confuses
people. They can't work out whey they can't go back and don't seem
to be aware of the task bar. I'm not sure how us
Nancy Gill wrote:
Actually, this link from the W3C suggests the use of both target and
title .. target to open the window and title to tell the user that a new
window will open.
Example 2: A link that opens in a new window
In HTML 4.01 the |target="_blank"| attribute can be used on a
But that is exactly the point. The www is a different space than the
desktop and web pages are not desktop apps (I fear an attack coming
soon but I think most people know where I'm coming from here).
The help application is the desktop space/mindspace, the contents of
a browser window is the
Another solution is http://wili.diegolamonica.info that allow you to open
discretional popup windows.
That page is in Italian only but in few days it will be translated in more
other languages.
It doesn't require that you are skilled in javascript, but requires to
follow only the instruction that
Just wanted to join the chorus and say that poping windows is behaviour and
should not be a part of the HTML spec.
not all browsers can "pop windows" (eg mobile phones, text browsers, etc)
...
***
List Guidelines: http://w
alia.
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Phone: +61 (0)7 3735 7630
Andrew Maben <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent by: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
28/03/2008 02:00 AM Please respond to
wsg@webstandardsgroup.org
To wsg@webstandardsgroup.org
cc
ED]>
Sent by: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
28/03/2008 02:00 AM
Please respond to
wsg@webstandardsgroup.org
To
wsg@webstandardsgroup.org
cc
Subject
Re: [WSG] a target=” blank” not part of xhtml
On Mar 27, 2008, at 11:44 AM, Michael Horowitz wrote:
I can't imagine its better practice to repla
Yes but you choose to do so rather than being forced to do so. Usability
tests still show that opening a new window confuses people. They can't
work out whey they can't go back and don't seem to be aware of the task
bar. I'm not sure how users react to tabbed browsers but in my own
limited expe
> Poping up windows makes assumtion of the user's behaviour.
I second that. Originally I had the "target" solution, then (to make it
XHTML-compliant) an inline JS solution. With the next redesign I will
throw it out altogether and just indicate external links through CSS,
but leave it to the user
> -Original Message-
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
> Behalf Of Michael Horowitz
> Sent: Thursday, March 27, 2008 8:45 AM
> To: wsg@webstandardsgroup.org
> Subject: [WSG] a target=" blank" not part of xhtml
>
> I just read how a target="_blank" is not part of xhtml
To pipe in extremely late on the matter - aside from it's deprecation
from XHTML Strict, forcing users to open links in new windows
introduces a host of usability problems. Including breaking the users
expectations, taking away user control and of course the infamous
breaking of the back button!
W
[EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Andrew Maben
Sent: 27 March 2008 16:01
To: wsg@webstandardsgroup.org
Subject: Re: [WSG] a target=" blank" not part of xhtml
On Mar 27, 2008, at 11:44 AM, Michael Horowitz wrote:
I can't imagine its better practice to repla
m: "Thomas Thomassen" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To:
Sent: Thursday, March 27, 2008 11:08 AM
Subject: Re: [WSG] a target=” blank” not part of xhtml
As for PDFs I find it ok that they open in a new window. As a personal
preferance.
But for regular links I feel that it's best leaving the
How is javascript more usable?
Michael Horowitz
Your Computer Consultant
http://yourcomputerconsultant.com
561-394-9079
Andrew Maben wrote:
On Mar 27, 2008, at 12:11 PM, Rob Kirton wrote:
of course you are right there, however if the brief says so
I know, I know... I'm in the middle
control those
things .. although I wonder how many people would know how to do that.
Not everyone who uses the internet is all that websavvy.
Nancy
- Original Message -
From: "Thomas Thomassen" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To:
Sent: Thursday, March 27, 2008 10:01 AM
Subj
On Mar 27, 2008, at 12:11 PM, Rob Kirton wrote:
of course you are right there, however if the brief says so
I know, I know... I'm in the middle of half a dozen
conversations in which which I'm being commanded to make hideous
assaults on usability - but I do feel duty-bound in every c
Thomas Thomassen wrote:
Frames and popup windows is fine features to use in web based
applications. I'll agree to that.
Which is exactly my point -- why remove (or even deprecate) a useful
capability because it's been abused by some?
--
Hassan Schroeder - [EMAIL P
David Dorward wrote:
It's not part of XHTML 1.0 Strict or Transitional
It is part of Transitional.
ah, rats -- must have been looking at the wrong DTD. More coffee!
Apologies for the mis-info...
--
Hassan Schroeder - [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Webtuitive Design === (+1)
n making some HTA applications myself.
But as I said, it's a different fish from websites.
-Thom
- Original Message -
From: "Hassan Schroeder" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To:
Sent: Thursday, March 27, 2008 6:59 PM
Subject: Re: [WSG] a target=” blank” not part of xhtml
On 27 Mar 2008, at 16:09, Rob Kirton wrote:
I would recommend that you use target="_new" and then use XHTML
transitional DTD
Don't do that. _new is not (X)HTML.
http://www.w3.org/TR/html4/types.html#h-6.16
Paraphrasing: "Except for the reserved names (_blank, _self, _parent,
_top), frame
On 27 Mar 2008, at 16:31, Hassan Schroeder wrote:
Michael Horowitz wrote:
I just read how a target=”_blank” is not part of xhtml
It's not part of XHTML 1.0 Strict or Transitional
It is part of Transitional.
-- it's part of XHTML 1.0 Frameset.
Frameset is for frameSET documents, i.e. tho
On 27 Mar 2008, at 15:44, Michael Horowitz wrote:
I just read how a target=”_blank” is not part of xhtml
You read wrong. It is not part of Strict (HTML or XHTML), it is part
of Transitional.
Why not.
Opening new windows is behaviour and thus out of scope for a markup
language that des
Thomas Thomassen wrote:
Poping up windows makes assumtion of the user's behaviour.
Making assumptions about users' needs and behavior is your job as
a designer/developer. Which is not to say everyone makes the best
possible decisions. :-)
Not everything built with (X)HTML is a brochureware sit
that. Not
everyone who uses the internet is all that websavvy.
Nancy
- Original Message -
From: "Thomas Thomassen" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To:
Sent: Thursday, March 27, 2008 10:01 AM
Subject: Re: [WSG] a target=” blank” not part of xhtml
Poping up windows makes as
2008 16:36
To: wsg@webstandardsgroup.org
Subject: Re: [WSG] a target=" blank" not part of xhtml
Has the same problem. Target is not xhtml.
Are people arguing web standards prohibit opening a new page in a new
browser or tab?
Michael Horowitz
Your Computer Consu
; <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To:
Sent: Thursday, March 27, 2008 5:03 PM
Subject: Re: [WSG] a target=” blank” not part of xhtml
I totally agree .. in fact just having this conversation elsewhere. How
can javascript be more accessible when those most concerned with
accessibility will probably turn it
Michael Horowitz wrote:
I just read how a target=”_blank” is not part of xhtml
It's not part of XHTML 1.0 Strict or Transitional -- it's part of
XHTML 1.0 Frameset. Choose the doctype you want to validate to. Or
use the JavaScript approach.
Ya pays yer money and ya makes yer choices :-)
FWIW,
For acessibility and usabilitty issues i think we shouldn't use this.
http://diveintoaccessibility.org/day_16_not_opening_new_windows.html
http://www.useit.com/alertbox/990530.html
http://www.w3.org/WAI/wcag-curric/sam77-0.htm
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-validator/2002Apr/0100.html
I totally agree .. in fact just having this conversation elsewhere. How can
javascript be more accessible when those most concerned with accessibility
will probably turn it off anyway? Makes no sense to have this removed .. I
open new windows all the time .. for PDFs .. for links that go offsi
Because it's against accessibility of a webpage.
On 27/03/2008, Michael Horowitz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> I just read how a target="_blank" is not part of xhtml
>
> Why not. I can't imagine its better practice to replace it with
> javascript.
>
> http://weblogtoolscollection.com/archives/20
On Mar 27, 2008, at 11:44 AM, Michael Horowitz wrote:
I can't imagine its better practice to replace it with javascript.
No, "better practice" is to avoid foisting new windows on users
altogether.
(IMHO - but I don't think I'm alone...)
Andrew
*
It's also not part of strict HTML either and makes perfect sense when you
consider that HTML = content, CSS = presentation and JavaScript = behaviour
:o)
target was originally introduced to be used for frames and seeing as frames
shouldn't technically be used anymore (deprecated in HTML5) it makes
35 matches
Mail list logo
