<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.01 Transitional//EN">
<meta content="text/html;charset=ISO-8859-1" http-equiv="Content-Type">
<body bgcolor="#ffffff" text="#000000">
Sander Tekelenburg schreef:
<pre wrap=""> So if you'd really want to help those people, you would not
provide a print link. You'd let them figure out how to print, or you could
add a help page that explains how to print a web page (making sure that
you're clear about which specific browsing environment you''re talking
<pre wrap="">A lot of site owners just don't want to do that as it turns the focus on
the browser instead of their.
Well, tough :) Users matter more than authors. (See
<a class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E" href="http://esw.w3.org/topic/HTML/ProposedDesignPrinciples#head-97abe59da6732ca0ab8a6d9d863b100bf1e51266"><http://esw.w3.org/topic/HTML/ProposedDesignPrinciples#head-97abe59da6732ca0ab8a6d9d863b100bf1e51266></a>.)
So when what authors want to do harms users, it is not a good idea to have
HTML cater for those authors.
But a lot of users just don't know their browser and they just don't
really bother to learn. They want things the easiest way, which in this
case would be that "print" does print when you click on it.<br>
I agree that it would be best if users knew how to use their
applications to the full extend, but that's just not reality for a
large part of users. Perhaps you have geek parents. I don't and I know
a lot of people like them who don't even know what a browser is
although they use them every now and then or even quite regularly.<br>
<pre wrap="">Providing a print link on the spot where you
refer to printing doesn't force the visitor to think (which seems to be the
credo in usability land).
Actually, it does force users to think because they now have to determine the
difference between that particular print link and their UA's built-in print
That may be the case for those who have visited this site of yours
(sorry ;-) ). I'm sure most won't even consider that there may be a
difference. And if there is a difference that should be made clear.<br>
<pre wrap="">You're right. It was indeed a quick example. What I meant to say was that
providing a link that offers what you're talking about is better than 'just'
talking about it.
Understood. I'm not sure I see how the comparison makes sense though. Are you
thinking of something like "We suggest you print this purchase confirmation"?
Because I'd disagree. You can compare that with "we suggest you listen to <a
href=filename.mp3>this exerpt of John Doe's speech</a>." Note that it makes
no sense to mark that up as "we suggest you <a href=filename.mp3>listen<a> to
this exerpt of John Doe's speech." Similarly ""We suggest you <a
href=print>print</a> this purchase confirmation" wouldn't make sense.
(Something like this could make sense however: "We suggest you print <a
href=URL>this purchase confirmation</a>", if it points to a document that
contains the purchase confirmation.)
What about "We suggest you <a href=print>print this purchase
There are some differences with your mp3 example compared to a print
The mp3-link always refers to a different file, whereas a print link
(mostly) refers to the current file. So, sticking to the given example,
you're probably already on the page with the purchase confirmation. And
linking to the page itself has no use in this case.<br>
More important, the mp3-file has a different extension that can trigger
a media player to play the file or the browser downloading it. For
print there's no such thing. If there was, that should probably be