<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.01 Transitional//EN">
<html>
<head>
<meta content="text/html;charset=ISO-8859-1" http-equiv="Content-Type">
</head>
<body bgcolor="#ffffff" text="#000000">
<br>
Sander Tekelenburg schreef:
<blockquote cite="mid:p06240606c2d09173f61c@%5B192.168.0.101%5D"
type="cite">
<pre wrap="">At 07:12 +0200 UTC, on 2007-07-28, Sander wrote:
</pre>
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre wrap="">Well, it can be usefull from a usability point of view to offer this
function from within the web page, for instance: "you may want to print
this confirmation", where print is a link that actually prints the page.
</pre>
</blockquote>
<pre wrap=""><!---->
I don't see how that is good usability. Quite the contrary, because this
approach means things work different on each website. That's confusing;
incosistency makes things harder to use. A print method that works the same
across web sites is much more usable.
</pre>
</blockquote>
I don't think it's confusing as the browser's own print button is still
there. So, people who prefer to use that one still can. For those who
are not so familiar with the interface of the browser it can be much
easier having the word "print" being an actual print link.<br>
Compare it to the sentence "You can find our address on the contact
page". From a usability point of view it is advisable to make "contact
page" a link to that page instead of having people to look where they
can find that page.<br>
<br>
<blockquote cite="mid:p06240606c2d09173f61c@%5B192.168.0.101%5D"
type="cite">
<pre wrap="">Well, they'll just have to learn. AFAIK on most OSs the print command/button
is/looks the same in every app. So all they need to learn is that. Having to
learn how to print on each differen web site is much more likely to fail.
</pre>
</blockquote>
Again, a print link does not disable the default print function of the
browser. It's an extra that can make it easier for the user.<br>
<br>
<blockquote cite="mid:p06240606c2d09173f61c@%5B192.168.0.101%5D"
type="cite">
<pre wrap="">Btw, consider the surprise of all those users clicking the link without
realising that it triggers their printer into wasting paper.
</pre>
</blockquote>
It's the responsibility of the author to make clear that it is a print
link. Just as with mailto-links.<br>
Then again, I believe there's always a print promt before the printing
really starts (or there should be).<br>
<br>
<blockquote cite="mid:p06240606c2d09173f61c@%5B192.168.0.101%5D"
type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre wrap="">Or maybe
you want to offer people the option to print different parts of the page
seperately.
</pre>
</blockquote>
<pre wrap=""><!---->
Yeah, that'd be useful. But it should be left up to the UA to provide users
with that. (As I understand it, iPhone's Safari more or less already does --
provided the document in question is well structured it allows users to
'grab' specific sections of a web page to interact with that section. Perhaps
it already does let users print that selected section?)
</pre>
</blockquote>
But if you leave it all up to the UA, then it's not all the same for
all users, in all cases.<br>
<br>
cheers,<br>
Sander<br>
<br>
</body>
</html>