After an evaluation, GNOME has moved from Bugzilla to GitLab. Learn more about GitLab.
No new issues can be reported in GNOME Bugzilla anymore.
To report an issue in a GNOME project, go to GNOME GitLab.
Do not go to GNOME Gitlab for: Bluefish, Doxygen, GnuCash, GStreamer, java-gnome, LDTP, NetworkManager, Tomboy.
Bug 309136 - Numbered page links are awkward
Numbered page links are awkward
Status: RESOLVED FIXED
Product: website
Classification: Infrastructure
Component: art.gnome.org (obsolete)
current
Other All
: Normal minor
: ---
Assigned To: art.gnome.org maintainers
art.gnome.org maintainers
Depends on:
Blocks:
 
 
Reported: 2005-06-27 15:12 UTC by Ian Dalton
Modified: 2005-07-15 00:18 UTC
See Also:
GNOME target: ---
GNOME version: ---



Description Ian Dalton 2005-06-27 15:12:25 UTC
Underline some or all links, especially the page number indicators.

Other information:
On web pages, users expect links to be blue and underlined. While the Bugzilla
and GNOME site use black underlined links, the GNOME Art site uses blue
non-underlined links. It may be bad to make links black, but it is far worse to
no underline them, unless the user is accepting of non-underlined links, in
which case he can specify this in his local stylesheet. When browsing
application themes, there is an indicator for which `page' one is on at the
bottom. It reads `1 2 3 4…'. However, the contrast between black and blue alone
is not enough to quickly discern which page one is on. Underlining the links
would create more contrast, as the current page would not only be black, but
would not be underlined.
Comment 1 SchAmane 2005-06-28 07:34:54 UTC
I cannt confirm this.
People who is expected to visit this page allready habe basic understanding off
web-browsing and have feeling for this.
You can see clickable objects on changing mouse pointer.
I see no reason for LINK style changes here.
Comment 2 Ian Dalton 2005-06-28 13:36:26 UTC
One shouldn't need to hover over a link to know it is a link.  The primary
concern is the number links when browsing a multi-page gallery; it is difficult
to distinguish the non-link that is the current page from the links that lead to
other numbered pages of the gallery, as stated earlier. Also, non-underlining
links gives the are site an inconsistent look against the main GNOME site.
Comment 3 Thomas Wood 2005-07-07 19:25:16 UTC
What about a compromise: underline links in body text and leave the heading
links not underlined (or only underline on hover)?
Comment 4 Ian Dalton 2005-07-08 22:59:55 UTC
The headings don't need underlines if it is obvious in some other way that they
are links, such as being separated from non-links.  The largest problems are
in-text links and page number links.  Those should be underlined.

Underline on hover sort of defeats the purpose, since hovering over a link
changes the cursor anyway.  It would also be annoying to have to `scrub' the
mouse over some text to see whether or not it is a link. It should be obvious.
Comment 5 James 2005-07-09 17:32:07 UTC
I agree, in-text links should be underlined, otherwise one would have to hunt
and peck for a link.
Comment 6 Thomas Wood 2005-07-13 21:35:27 UTC
Committed a change to the style sheet that fixes this bug.
Comment 7 Sven Neumann 2005-07-14 17:02:26 UTC
People don't expect links to be underlined for at least five years now.
Underlined links look horrible and adds nothing. As long as the link has a
clearly distinct color and causes a cursor change, there's no point in
explicitely adding underlines to links. Whether or not a link is underlined is a
user setting in the client browser. You should consider to revert this change.
Comment 8 Ian Dalton 2005-07-15 00:18:02 UTC
Why not just keep it out of the stylesheet altogether, and let the user decide?
Obviously there are those who prefer underlined links and some who do not, so
just leave the choice up to the browser.

As a side note, people do expect links to be underlined. That is why it is still
the default setting in all (excepting perhaps a few) major browsers.