Re: [boost] Re: [website] More "improvements"..

From: Rene Rivera (grafik.list_at_[hidden])
Date: 2005-04-02 23:06:39

Miro Jurisic wrote:
> In article <424ECCC4.1090704_at_[hidden]>,
>  Rene Rivera <grafik.list_at_[hidden]> wrote:
> 
>>>>* IMO Links in the body don't look good. (I mean dash underlining).
>>>
>>>I agree with this.  If you want a de-emphasized indicator some kind of
>>>pale solid underline would work.  I suppose the dashes are supposed to
>>>work with any background color the user chooses?  Even a dotted
>>>(alternating pixels) line would be better.
>>
>>I actually agree.. My first attempt was to use the "dotted" underlines 
>>and the do look much better than the "dashed". But that brings up 
>>another unfortunate browser issue: IE doesn't support the "dotted" 
>>borders and displays "dashed" borders instead.
>>
>>Guess I'll have to try and draw my own borders for this :-\  --  Or just 
>>make IE users suffer the less pleasing look.
> 
> Several browsers use non-solid underline as the default appearance of elements 
> which display a pop-up clarification on mouseover. See 
> <http://tribblescape.com/archives/20030228_html_acronym_tagging.php> for an 
> example. For this reason, I would be extremely hesitant to use non-solid 
> underlines for links.

1. Why would you be hesitant? Is there some usability issue with using a 
similar, or even same, indicator for both elements?

2. Perceptually speaking it's not a problem to use the same (or similar) 
visual cues to decorate different elements all of which are active. The 
decoration is indicating that they are active not what the activity is.

-- 
-- Grafik - Don't Assume Anything
-- Redshift Software, Inc. - http://redshift-software.com
-- rrivera/acm.org - grafik/redshift-software.com - 102708583/icq