License Prices, Real, and docs
troy at rpsystems.net
Sun Jun 9 18:50:01 CDT 2002
On Sunday, June 9, 2002, at 05:19 PM, Wolfgang M. Bereuter wrote:
>> Having faced this problem (many glossary terms - relatively small
>> amount of text) with a number of educational software titles we have
>> developed we opted to provide page-specific lists of glossary terms
>> adjacent to the main text. I have to agree with Troy that 'invisible'
>> hyperlinks are way less than ideal.
> Me too...
> this makes the user working (reading) like a dough mixers ;)
Yes, regardless of Jeanne's excellently portrayed case for the contrary,
I'll reassert that invisible hot links are EXTREMELY poor design, in any
and all cases. While I recognize that there is a difference in "primary"
and glossary hot links, having one set as invisible basically says that
they are so inconsequential that they are hardly worth the bother. The
fact that they are invisible almost ensures that they will not be used.
I certainly don't wave my cursor around pages of text in hopes that
there exists some "hidden gem" of information which will make things
more clear, or provide additional clues as to what I am attempting to
do. I have never seen a case which justifies providing links to some
information, and then making them invisible. Revolution documentation
Besides, if colorizing makes things more difficult to read, why does
every scripter I know prefer colorized script?
I would suggest making glossary links a very deep blue, which would not
contrast dramatically with the black text of the documentation, yet
would provide a clue that there is some additional information if one is
More information about the use-livecode