|
|
Posted by Art on 09/12/07 22:17
On 9/11/07 5:33 PM, Jukka K. Korpela wrote:
> Scripsit Art:
[...]
>> There are some instances where an alternate type of hyperlink
>> identification by color and styling is desirable.
>
> To whom?
Professional web site designers and their clients who pay the bills.
[...]
> When visiting a site, it can be quite relevant to see
> at a glance which sections you have already visited.
One could make that case for links within body text that refer to static
content, but not for masthead navigation links that point to content
that is dynamic. Colorizing the "visited" state in these cases serves no
useful purpose and could even be interpreted as counter-intuitive to the
viewer.
Major sites such as cnn.com, nytimes.com, netflix.com, yahoo.com,
si.com, google.com and many others all deploy a consistent graphical
design and color scheme within their navigation mastheads with no
"visited" color indication.
>
> Besides, putting _external_ links into a navigation bar would be odd, and
> the original question was aboud separating external links from internal
> links,
cnn.com distinguishes external vs. internal links via color in their
masthead links that point to sites outside their cnn.com domain (eg.
time.com).
>
>> background: inherit; \* for CSS checker compliance *\
[...]
> You want to use a CSS checker but silence its warnings
[...]
.... and incur the wrath of the alt.html police for posting non-compliant
code :-) ?
BTW, the comments were pasted into the code snippets for clarity. Sorry
that the markers are backwards (should be /*...*/ pairs) - a result of
late night keyboard dyslexia :-).
Art
Navigation:
[Reply to this message]
|