Re: HTML4.01 STRICT and hyperlinks with target


Guy Macon schreef:
Erwin Moller wrote:


Hi Guy,

Thanks for the load of links, I knew one or two already.
I'll work through them.

I want to use STRICT to make sure my pages are well build.
I DON'T want w3c removing attibutes that are considered useful by many.

<BLINK> was/is considered useful by many...

It has been my experience that many who think that target blank is useful have not bothered to read and understand the reasons why it is so reviled. The following pages make
a compelling case, and are well worth your time.

Using the target blank tag to force a link to open in a new window breaks the Back button
http://diveintoaccessibility.org/day_16_not_opening_new_windows.html

Yes, the back button is broken in a new window.
(Exception, windows opened with JavaScript can keep the the browsinghistory)
Conclusion: don't open new windows without a good reason.



Target Blank is a Crime
http://valhallaisland.com/blog/2008/target-blank/

Well, that writer makes a few mistakes.

This is the worst:
[quote]
Don’t assume you know better than your users when it comes to ingrained expected behaviour. If they want a link opened in a new window, they will command click or select the option from a contextual menu. If they don’t want it opened in a new window they’ll click without a modifier like normal and expect normal behaviour.
[/quote]

This is maybe true for experienced websurfers, but surely NOT for everybody. Like I wrote elsewhere: Using a controlbutton to open a new window is considered as complex as quantummechanics to some.
So I want to help them.

I am NOT opening a new window to keep my company's webpage active, I am opening a new window for ease of use of administrative tasks.



The Top Ten Web Design Mistakes http://www.useit.com/alertbox/990530.html
(You are making mistake #1 and mistake #2...)

More of the same:

[quote]
1. Breaking or Slowing Down the Back Button
<snip>
[/quote]

I addressed that already. I don't open new windows for no reason.
In my case the user don't need the back button anyway in the new window.
(And yes, in this case that is up to me do decide.)

[quote]
2. Opening New Browser Windows
Opening up new browser windows is like a vacuum cleaner sales person who starts a visit by emptying an ash tray on the customer's carpet. Don't pollute my screen with any more windows, thanks (particularly since current operating systems have miserable window management). If I want a new window, I will open it myself!
Designers open new browser windows on the theory that it keeps users on their site. But even disregarding the user-hostile message implied in taking over the user's machine, the strategy is self-defeating since it disables the Back button which is the normal way users return to previous sites. Users often don't notice that a new window has opened, especially if they are using a small monitor where the windows are maximized to fill up the screen. So a user who tries to return to the origin will be confused by a grayed out Back button.
[/quote]

"Designers open new browser windows on the theory that it keeps users on their site."
Jumping to conclusions?
This guy (no pun intended) is making up his own argument, puts it into your/my mouth, only to show the argument is invalid. Then he concludes his first statement must be true.
I believe this is refered to as the 'strawman argument', a famous logical fallacy.

I do not want to keep my company's website open.
I want to create an easy-going GUI for my clients.



Links in new windows (target="blank") considered harmful
http://annevankesteren.nl/2004/09/new-window

Allthough I visited annevankesteren.nl for other things, I think this article is of little importance.


I want my window, dammit! (or how to destroy target _blank)
http://meddle.dzygn.com/eng/weblog/destroy.target/


That article describes how to avoid it from happening.

WAI WCAG 1.0 checkpoint 10.1:
"...do not cause pop-ups or other windows to appear and do
not change the current window without informing the user..."



Guy, seriously, the BACK button is the only valid argument.
If webmasters like to open windows for no reason, they will only annoy their visitors, I totally agree to that.

Still: I don't get it why the STRICT doctype doesn't allow the target attribute.

Like I said elsewhere: I YOU (or the whole w3c) thinks a red border around an image is annoying, you don't forbid it.
You allow the annoying red border, maybe warn against it, but you don't forbid it.

In my opinion, this was a really bad call from w3c.
It helps NOBODY.

--> Stupid webmasters who want to create many many new windows still do so (using transitional, or even STRICT and don't validate).
--> Good willing webmasters (like me) are forced to use transitional because of lack of support of the target attribute.

So this decision is helping nobody.

I need a working solution for my problem, and I want it in STRICT.
Right now the only solution I have involves full pagereloads, unless Andrienne can help me out (See other part of this thread). ;-)

Thanks for your time though. :-)

Regards,
Erwin Moller


--
============================
Erwin Moller
Now dropping all postings from googlegroups.
Why? http://improve-usenet.org/
============================
.

Loading