Forum Moderators: open
How do you feel about leaving the visited color of your links to the browser default?
In the past I've always specified visited links as the same color blue as normal links because it looks better but, in the redesign of a new site I've not got to writing the CSS for my link colors/actions yet and have gotten quite into the idea of leaving them as the ugly purple they tend to be by defaut.
We know that navigating, and more importantly, navigating with intuitive ease is essential for a website if you want your users to browse more than a couple of pages right? So, how much does the visited link color play in this?
Has anyone done any split testing on this, or have anything useful to share on the subject?
Opinions sought, and welcomed.
Nick
Hence, on my site, I just let link colors default.
Nick
I've always made my a:link and a:visited links the same color. I think way back in the beginning of my design career, I was getting tired of clearing my history so I could see what the site really looked like in all of its glory.
I just switched one site I manage over to providing visual clues for visited links. Based on my research so far, you need to provide enough contrast between a:link and a:visited so that users know they've visited that resource.
I'm not real thrilled using a:link{color:#00a} and a:visited{color:#609} as those colors do not work well with many designs. As I move forward with my research into WCAG Triple-A status, I find more and more of those sites using the default browser colors for link attributes. In some instances, the effect is downright ugly.
It helps to view your color choices in grayscale to make sure that even people who don't see well in color will still see a difference - that is, don't just vary the Hue. But the principle is to use some visual cue that makes the link less attention grabbing.
It is possible to do this in most cases without doing extreme violence to the aestheics of a site's palette. It's a lot easier if the graphics designer has it in mind from the beginning.
I think way back in the beginning of my design career, I was getting tired of clearing my history so I could see what the site really looked like in all of its glory.
I'm almost positive that that's where my habbit came from! - Interesting points guys...
Nick
I like tedsters theory, as long as there is some sort of contrast between link, visited, hover and active, what more could the visitor ask for? ;)
eh? - Example p1r? ;-)
Nick
#bindex a#index, #barticles a#articles, #bblogs a#blogs, {
font-variant:small-caps;
color:#000;
background:#eee;
}
And then in the <body> of each page...
<body id="bindex">
<body id="barticles">
<body id="bblogs">
And then in the link for that page...
<a href="/" id="index">
<a href="/articles/" id="articles">
<a href="/blogs/" id="blogs">
That will then highlight the link of the page that you are visiting. It lets the visitor know which page they are on.
[edited by: pageoneresults at 6:49 am (utc) on Aug. 1, 2003]
I've always used a bit of PHP to work in a class="active" on the right anchor...
Nick
I've always used a bit of PHP...
Unfortunately I need a bit of ASP if anyone out there has some. ;)
I've been able to trim fat out elsewhere and redistribute it where it is needed. I like the functionality of the CSS and it is blazing fast. There are no delays whatsoever in rollover or active states. It could get a little unwieldy on a larger scale site although I'm managing about 50 links right now with one style sheet and it performs just fine.
Yeah. We have to keep this in context: Imagine the table based/JS/gif rollover equivalent ;)
Nick
a visited link should look "used" or "spent" somehow
Ehm... delete the link? ;)
It kinda looks like the page is saying you're not allowed to go there anymore..
Suzy
[edited by: engine at 9:12 pm (utc) on Aug. 1, 2003]
[edit reason] No sigs, thanks. See TOS [webmasterworld.com] [/edit]
