Rules on links I don’t understand
September 30, 2003 at 10:38 pm | In yulelogStories | 12 CommentsDave Winer has posted an essay, The Rule of Links, where he states that linking is “one of the fundamental ideas of the Web.” I understand that, and I also understand his analogy to footnotes or endnotes, and that links are an incredible improvement over both. But I don’t understand why links shouldn’t open in a new window. Dave says that “links that open in new windows are non-web-like.” This makes no sense to me, although I’m ready to hear explanations from the “same-window” camp — maybe I’m missing something. But here’s why I don’t understand the new-window-is-a-no-no rule: a link that opens in a new window allows me to look at both sites simultaneously, and allows me to compare and contrast, or to read the link-site even as I glance at the source-site. Opening in new windows, for me, makes the link similar to footnotes — they are on the same page as the printed text of the book, meaning I can see text and footnotes simultaneously. This is wholly unlike endnotes, which are tucked away at the back of the book and which involve a lot of flipping around. I like footnotes, and I really dislike endnotes. Links that don’t open in a new window are, to my mind, exactly like endnotes: they don’t allow me to stream two or three things simultaneously, they force me to flip back and forth. Then there are sites that develop some kind of tic: Chris Locke for example added a talking fish a while ago. Since the arrival of the dratted fish, his site has become user-unfriendly for me: one, I can’t hear the fish, even though I have the plug-in, thank-you; two, I get an error message every time I go to his site telling me I don’t have the plug-in. Now, his links don’t open in new windows, and consequently I almost never click on them now, because if I do, I have to reload Chris’s site when I hit the back button, and when I do that, I get the error message all over again. If, however, his links opened in new windows, this wouldn’t be a problem. (Aside from the initial problem, which I’m apparently incapable of fixing, unless this is some stupid Freudian joke. But honestly, I have the plug-in.)
And whether my link opens in a new window or the same window, why is the one not web-like while the other is? Just because spiders spin their webs in two dimensions doesn’t mean we humans can’t spin them in 2 or 3 or 4 …windows. When did this no-new-windows rule get made, and who made it? Anyone?
Weather report
September 30, 2003 at 9:24 pm | In yulelogStories | Comments OffIt’s official: according to today’s paper, Victoria and Nanaimo (both on Vancouver Island) “are at the top of the heap in the only weather category that counts — most comfortable climate” — they’re tied in first place. This from a new Environment Canada analysis “developed from 30 years of weather data for the country’s 100 largest cities.” The study looked at 72 weather categories, used data from as far back as 1840, and considered “more than 200 million weather observations originating from 7,000 different sites.” Victoria and Nanaimo have the best combination of 23 weather categories “conducive to ‘comfortable’ weather”: mild winters, plentiful sunshine, low humidity and little fog. “Victoria stands alone as having the least amount of snow.” Gander, Newfoundland has the most. In fact, Newfoundland cities (only locales in excess of pop.5,000 were included, otherwise Iqaluit, Nunavut would have won) have the “toughest” weather. Well, “Newfies”… what can one say? They have for so long been the butt of jokes, the “challenged” cousins of New Englanders, so to speak. Blame it on the weather, perhaps? More details on the Environment Canada website.
Theme: Pool by Borja Fernandez.
Entries and comments feeds.