Hi Michael > Navigating anywhere in Microsoft's site is a nightmare. You go down a maze > of links until its almost impossible to work your way back where you came > from.
Is this an argument against the usefulness of the back button (or the navigation metaphor entirely)? If Microsoft chose to open links in new windows you'd end up with a mess of windows, rather than a messy history. This is not an improvement. Microsoft's site is poorly designed. How is this relevant to the argument? :) > In my case, I get someone into my site, and I don't want to see them heading > off again by just clicking on a tool my site gives them to leave. Not only are you working against the navigation metaphor, you're working against yourself when you force links to open in new windows. Example: 1. User finds your site, browses around it, finds external links. 2. User clicks link, fresh new window is opened. 3. User is done with your site, and closes your window. 4. User browses site opened in new window, realises there was something else they wanted to use your site for. 5. Uh oh. Is your site so great that they're going to do the work to get back to it (by Googling for it, or braving their history), or are they just going to go some place else? If a user really wants to open a new window for a link, she can: right-click, Open in New Window, or middle-click if it's available. If you're forcing new windows to open when links are clicked, there is no way for the user to choose to open the links in the original window and maintain the metaphor. You are taking a meaningful choice away from the user. Granted, there are pros for the behaviour that you're arguing for -- but there are so many cons! Cheers, -- Andrew Taumoefolau ***************************************************** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list & getting help *****************************************************
