Thierry Koblentz said: >> Both. You have misinterpreted the articles, and have formed an opinion >> based on that misintrepretation. > I disagree. So you keep saying, but your actions are different.
>> you use skip links on your site but are argueing here that every >> link must load an entirely new document. > What I'm using on my site has absolutely nothing to with the way I > interpret the USEIT articles. I never said it did. What I said is you are practicing the opposite of what you are preaching. >> If you replaced it with "chocolate orange cake" it would make sense >> according to your logic, but it becomes glaringly obvious just how >> wrong that logic is. > I disagree in fact, you *do* agree with me, you just seem unable to see how it relates to the argument you are putting forward... Read on > FWIW I find your analogy pretty silly. Exactly. As is your assertion that a recommendation against opening new windows is a recommendation against using in-page anchors. Substituting anything in Nielsens recommendation distorts the recommendation: it *is not* what he said, and it *does not* make sense. "using jump links" is not the same as "opening new windows" and it clearly isn't "chocolate orange cake". >> Hypertext links are the foundation of the web. > That's the W3C talking, AFAIK, it has absolutely nothing to do with > usability/accessibility. Web Standards. Consistency. Platform conventions. The thing that defines the web. > It is about how things are supposed to work Exactly. If things work the way they are supposed to, then you can't get much more usable than that. > [accesskey's have] usability/accessibility issues attached Yes they do, but that is a browser implementation issue, not a markup issue. e.g. Macs browser's and Opera's accesskey implemenatation do not conflict with the OS like other PC browsers. > So how can you say that "jump links" in a document are consistent with > the navigation links for example? They don't have to be, in the same way that main nav, secondary nav, and in-content links are generally easy to distinguish and understand: they should be consistent within the context in which they appear (internally consistent within a block?). That said, you might have to hack in a div or heading here and there. See: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hyperlink#toctitle > Actually, I believe the key is to let the user *know* what's about to > happen... a FAQ page that says "clicking on the Qs will reveals the As > below" is less an issue than "jump links" that do not warn the user of > what's gonna happen next. When a user clicks on a link they *know* they will be taken to the resource described by that hypertext link. It doesn't even need an explantion because it is so fundamental. 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 ******************************************************
