WebAIM - Web Accessibility In Mind

E-mail List Archives

Re: Link vs Button for "Cancel"

for

From: Birkir R. Gunnarsson
Date: Jan 9, 2018 8:36AM

It's a double edged sword.
If HTML was as strict as C# or what have you, I doubt the internet
would ever have took off.
Most people with a little patience can create a webpage. Not a
beautiful, attractive, interactive and rich webpage, but a functional
webpage that displays text and images.
If their compiler had failed their code for a small semantic error,
they would have given up.

But it makes HTML messy, confusing and allows people who don't have
the faintest idea how to code good HTML to have a website.

I'm in the "we're over analyzing" camp on links vs. buttons.
In fact I think the "cancel" action should be a link rather than a
button. It navigates you away from the page without taking an action
(granted it takes an implicit action by eliminating all the data you
provided).
The problem in this particular setup, in my opinion, is that the
cancel link shouldn't look like a button.

I wrote a long piece on links vs. buttons once. I never got around to
publishing it, but I became increasingly convinced that we are
spending too much energy focusing on this vs. other issues such as
keyboard accessibility, semantics, color contrast and clarity of
content.
If it has the approximate appropriate text for the job and if it shows
up in the expected location, the user will try to click it. A keyboard
only user will try to activate it. If spacebar doesn't work, he will
try the enter key, The enter key will work.

I'm not saying this discussion is invalid or that there isn't a
problem, I am just saying that this is hardly ever going to be a user
blocker.
Cheers
-B

On 1/9/18, JP Jamous < <EMAIL REMOVED> > wrote:
> Brian,
>
> I sure agree with you guys. Stick to proper HTML semantic. Unfortunately,
> that's not the facts of the real world.
>
> I preach in all of my training classes and workshops to stick to proper HTML
> semantic. Yet, the resistance with the addition to presenting A11Y as a
> positive component of the SDLC force us to bend the rules.
>
> High jacking a link is definitely not a proper HTML semantic, but HTML was
> all built wrong from the beginning. I am talking back into the 90's. That's
> why I love coding with strict languages like C++, C#.NET, VB.NET and SQL.
> One tiny mistake and that compiler gets ticked off and comes back at the
> developer with an angry face. I wish there is such a thing for HTML besides
> the W3C validator.
>
> I think of those native coding languages as professional boxing, whereas
> HTML is street fighting. Use whatever means to win even if they are against
> the rules. *Smiles*
>
>