From: Séamas Ó Brógáin (leabhair@iol.ie)
Date: Mon Jul 24 2006 - 04:29:58 CDT
I agree with Jukka. And I think there's an additional argument that
has not yet been made.
The whole point of hypertext, from the time of its invention, was
that a portion of the _text_ you are reading could lead you to
another text. For this purpose a relevant word or phrase is
identified (typically underlined and in a different colour) as the
hypertext link.
Authors of web pages use their ingenuity to decide which term should
be used as the link that will be most useful for the reader. If you
are reading an article about Rome, a reference to, say, the Sistine
Chapel occurs in a natural way within the syntax of the sentence but
is highlighted in such a way that you know that if you click on it
you will be taken to a new text. You probably don't want a little
pictorial symbol beside it (should I click on the symbol or on the
words?). Even worse is a gratuitous additional phrase saying "Click
here for . . ." These contrivances both go contrary to the idea of
hypertext and to its greatest usefulness for readers and should be
avoided rather than encouraged.
Séamas Ó Brógáin
----------------
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Mon Jul 24 2006 - 04:40:05 CDT