WebAIM - Web Accessibility In Mind

E-mail List Archives

Re: Link format: to underline or not

for

From: Steve Green
Date: Oct 6, 2010 8:57AM

I agree with you, but I see no indication that the browser vendors intend to
address the problem any time soon, and perhaps they never will. Much as I
hate state interference, one solution would be for the EU or US Government
to mandate an accessibility page in the same way that they forced Microsoft
to add a browser ballot page.

If these things don't happen (and I suspect they won't) what else can we do
other than build these features into our websites?

Steve



-----Original Message-----
From: <EMAIL REMOVED>
[mailto: <EMAIL REMOVED> ] On Behalf Of steven
Sent: 06 October 2010 10:49
To: 'WebAIM Discussion List'
Subject: Re: [WebAIM] Link format: to underline or not

"What good does it do to say that someone else should fix the problem if
that person persists in not fixing it?"

If we fix the problem on a website by website basis, we're not fixing
'accessibility' at the right level though. There are billions and trillions
of website that would need fixing with that approach (where we currently
are), for them to all be adequately accessible. That isn't economical and it
certainly isn't efficient, hence most websites are not adequately
accessible.

As seems to be agreed, fixing at the browser level is going to make the
impact of making the web adequately accessible, simply on the mathematical
basis that there are few browsers to fix in order to fix a larger number of
websites. So where does this really put us as developers? Should we really
still be adding extra content to html pages to compensate for lack of
browser accessibility features? in the same way we formerly did when we
added transparent gifs, nested tables and popup windows (which have now been
shunned, but only in hindsight - something I think we should fix now,
without needing to wait 10 years again to repeat).

Just think of all that time spent, building the inaccessible internet
monster we have today, that we are now hell bent on slaying. Can we really
not learn from our previous mistake?

Steven




-----Original Message-----
From: <EMAIL REMOVED>
[mailto: <EMAIL REMOVED> ] On Behalf Of Steve Green
Sent: 05 October 2010 17:34
To: 'WebAIM Discussion List'
Subject: Re: [WebAIM] Link format: to underline or not

In the ideal world that would happen, but after more than 15 years there's
no sign of browser vendors doing so. In all the years I've been doing user
testing I've met dozens of people who would benefit from customising their
browser settings, but a tiny number who knew that they could, let alone knew
how to do so.

Maybe browser vendors should ship their products with an accessibility
toolbar that contains all these options. The toolbar could be displayed by
default so people could see the options are there. Anyone who doesn't need
them could then hide the toolbar.

Until then I don't see any reason why website designers should not provide
these features in the website. What good does it do to say that someone else
should fix the problem if that person persists in not fixing it?

Steve Green
Director
Test Partners Ltd



-----Original Message-----
From: <EMAIL REMOVED>
[mailto: <EMAIL REMOVED> ] On Behalf Of Patrick H. Lauke
Sent: 05 October 2010 16:36
To: WebAIM Discussion List
Subject: Re: [WebAIM] Link format: to underline or not

the real solution is not for web designers to code style switchers, skip
links, text resizers etc, but for browsers to have clear ways for users to
choose defaults and overrides, and for users to set up their browsing
environment accordingly. isn't that the idea of css? author suggests
presentation, but user can override if needed/desired?

p
--
Patrick H. Lauke


On 5 Oct 2010, at 15:57, "steven" < <EMAIL REMOVED> > wrote:

> Whose links preference should in fact be the default? Mine as the
developer?
> Other developers? The browser developers? Should there even be a
> default? We are all users of the internet afterall and everyone is who
> I am trying to cater for ...
>
> Maybe we need to introduce a link to toggle link styling, as per those
> font size links that are often made available!?
>
> Steven
>
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: <EMAIL REMOVED>
> [mailto: <EMAIL REMOVED> ] On Behalf Of steven
> Sent: 05 October 2010 15:46
> To: 'WebAIM Discussion List'
> Subject: Re: [WebAIM] Link format: to underline or not
>
> I agree with your counter points Jared, but should we really still be
> encouraging copy text to be broken up with high contrasting links?
>
> Look at the web page you referred to as an example. By default, the
> contrast of the links in the copy disrupt the hierarchy of headers and
> grammatical emphasis within the copy itself (it clearly does not read
> as well as a traditional printed text document for example). Not
> significantly, but the links (being styled as per the menu)
> semantically draw the menu and copy together (visually) ... I don't
> think
that is the correct thing to do.
> Encouraging this sort of practice is also not going to help us truely
> separate content from structure, if the structure is being merged into
> the content in such a way, surely?
>
> Or maybe I am being too picky?
>
> Steven
>
>
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: <EMAIL REMOVED>
> [mailto: <EMAIL REMOVED> ] On Behalf Of Jared Smith
> Sent: 05 October 2010 14:40
> To: WebAIM Discussion List
> Subject: Re: [WebAIM] Link format: to underline or not
>
> On Tue, Oct 5, 2010 at 7:11 AM, steven wrote:
>> I generally am in favour of making text as easy to read as possible,
>> on
> the
>> basis that text links are generally assistive to non linked text and
>> therefore are often of secondary importance.
>
> I disagree. Any slight decrease in readability of a few underlined
> words of a link is far outweighed by the benefits of having the links
> clearly distinguishable via the underline. Large sections of
> underlined text are more difficult to read, but I haven't seen
> anything that indicates that a succinct, underlined link causes
> readability issues. On the other hand, there's plenty to indicate that
> not underlining links can cause usability issues in many cases. Using
> color alone to distinguish links is not usually sufficient. Consider
> small screen devices, touch screen devices, users with low vision,
> users that override page colors, color-blindness, new users that
> expect links to be underlined, etc.
>
> If you don't underline links by default, be sure to consider the
> significant requirements necessary to make those links truly
> accessible. See http://webaim.org/blog/wcag-2-0-and-link-colors/ for
> more details. In short, you must have sufficient contrast with
> non-link text and you must introduce a non-color designator on both
> mouse hover and keyboard focus.
>
>> And as much as I agree with
>> blue underlined text being commonly associated as links, I consider
>> them
> to
>> be leftovers of a by-gone era that has moved on
>
> I have a tough time believing that the default styling and
> presentation of the most significant element in HTML, the hypertext
> link, is somehow faux pas or a relic of yesteryear. Considering the
> proliferation of touch screen devices, I strongly suspect that
> non-underlined links will instead soon become the leftovers of a
> by-gone era.
>
> Jared Smith
> WebAIM
>