[thelist] IE - The claret (white dotted line) on clickable images

[MRC]

.jeff,

> > AFAIK, the dotted outline is only useful to the sighted.
> ><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><

> yes, which is why i qualified my statement by referring to a specific
subset
> of keyboard users -- the sighted.  i've personally come to rely on the
> dotted outline when chasing down information from a page full of links.
> when i toggle back to the window with all the links the last one i clicked
> on has the outline around it.   it's now very easy for me to find where i

    Yep, it can be handy that way. Accessibility for the non-disabled.

> left off.  removing that makes it more difficult.  if the "designer" of
the
> site chose in his/her infinite wisdom to also make the visited link color
> the same as the link color then i'm completely screwed.  i'm not impaired
or

    And virtually all requests that I have ever seen to remove the dotted
line are because "it looks ugly" or some such complaint. Most of the time
this is vanity garbed in the rags of ignorance.

> ><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><
> > The hidefocus property has drawbacks, but focus-bouncing
> > is not one of them.
> ><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><
>
> one of these drawbacks is most certainly one of validation.

    True. Granted, one could script the hidefocus property in order to
achieve technical validation. Aside from that, however, this would become a
question of whether use of the property was worthwhile enough to break
validation. Another case of a general rule -- write standards-compliant
code -- that, in some cases, an experienced designer may choose to break.
    As an aside, I will go out on a limb and suggest that while Mozilla has
a marginal lead in standards-compliance, IE has a clear lead in innovating
new properties, methods, etc. Some people consider some of these (such as
scrollbar coloring) frivolous, while others complain that Microsoft should
nail down the basics first (I agree with that, btw). But IE does have some
excellent capabilities that are not standard -- at least not *yet*
standard -- that I often choose to use. I won't argue that hidefocus is
necessarily one of them, but it is part of the mix.

> ><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><
> > One *possible* scenario for removing the dotted line
> > around an element:  you have several linked images that
> > represent buttons on a button bar in a web-based
> > application.  Many standard applications don't provide
...
> this is a excellently crafted argument for an exception and probably one
of
> the only ones i'd entertain as valid since the point of removing them from
> some items is to maintain consistency with other applications the user is
> familiar with thereby improving the usability.

    Crafty, indeed. ;) Again, I would argue that legitimate reasons are few
for removing the focus outline, but there are *some* exceptions. And we
don't appear to disagree on that.

> in my opinion, just because we may eventually be able to remove or modify
> the outline doesn't mean that we should.  it's been purposely been
recreated
> to look and behave the same as in other applications.  modifying it takes
> away the instant familiarity, replacing it with "huh?  what's this?" from
> the user.  with basic navigational aids, that sort of question can be a
> showstopper.

    Agreed. Usability is probably 75% familiarity -- maybe more. If you take
that away, you have a lot of work to do in order to make a site or web app
readily usable again. Probably not usually the best use of a designer's or
developer's time.

James Aylard