On Wed, 8 Dec 2004 10:54:54 +1300, Andy Kirkwood | MOTIVE
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Been following the breadcrumb (BC) discussion, and think it may come
> down to defining the *purpose* of the BC. Through a process of
> distillation I've arrived at the following conclusions;
>
> The ('correct') semantic markup of a BC should be based on what the
> BC primarily 'means'.
While the breadcrumbs discussion over the last few days has been
vaguely interesting - the long drawn out squabbling over semantics
reminds me why I don't bother following the Usenet HTML/CSS newsgroups
anymore! - I'd have to ask if breadcrumbs are really that important.
This is veering off-topic rapidly, but here's an interesting
discussion on real world data on the use of breadcrumb navigation
which suggests they're not utilised by most average users:
http://www.humanfactors.com/downloads/oct04.asp#kath
--
Kay Smoljak
http://kay.smoljak.com/
******************************************************
The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/
See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
for some hints on posting to the list & getting help
******************************************************
