New window using css

Discussion in 'HTML' started by Isidore, Jul 5, 2004.

  1. Isidore

    Isidore Guest

    I have a group of pages that are indexes of links to other page. Is
    it possible to use css to make any link on one of these pages open in
    new browser?

    What about if you also want some of those links (nav bar links) NOT
    to open in a new browser?

    Thanks in advance,
    Isidore
     
    Isidore, Jul 5, 2004
    #1
    1. Advertising

  2. Isidore

    Mitja Guest

    Isidore <>
    (news:) wrote:
    > I have a group of pages that are indexes of links to other page. Is
    > it possible to use css to make any link on one of these pages open in
    > new browser?


    CSS is about style, so no, you can't do it.

    You can, however, use the link's target property and set it to "_blank". If
    this is the desired behavior most of the time, have a look at the <base>
    tag.

    Opening new windows is in most cases not advised, however. It confuses the
    less experienced and infuriates the others.

    > What about if you also want some of those links (nav bar links) NOT
    > to open in a new browser?


    Again, have a look at the "target" attribute and, optionally, at the "base"
    tag.


    > Thanks in advance,
    > Isidore
     
    Mitja, Jul 5, 2004
    #2
    1. Advertising

  3. Isidore

    Arondelle Guest

    Mitja wrote:

    > Opening new windows is in most cases not advised, however. It confuses the
    > less experienced and infuriates the others.


    Not necessarily. If I were viewing a list of links, particularly a list
    that I wanted to return to after viewing the subsequent link, I would
    appreciate not having to reload the original page over and over, and
    possibly lose it altogether if I were to get deeper into the link-to site.

    People who use pop-up blockers simply short circuit the opening of new
    windows. If they get angry, it's their own fault.

    Of course, it's good design to consider whether or not opening a new
    window is absolutely necessary beforehand. Lists of links, yeah.
    Advertisements, yeah. Gallery items, possibly. Most every other
    application, probably not.

    Note: Not everyone is aware that (in Internet Explorer, anyway) one can
    right-click on a link and force it to open in a new window, regardless
    of the designer's wishes or ommissions.

    Arondelle
    --
    ===========================================================
    To email me, empty the pond with a net
     
    Arondelle, Jul 5, 2004
    #3
  4. Arondelle wrote:

    > Not necessarily. If I were viewing a list of links, particularly a list
    > that I wanted to return to after viewing the subsequent link, I would
    > appreciate not having to reload the original page over and over, and
    > possibly lose it altogether if I were to get deeper into the link-to site.


    Your browser has an Open in New Window (and possibly an Open in New Tab)
    option. You can exercise that option to get a new window whenever you want.

    Techniques which force new windows on users don't make it easy for a user to
    force the link to open in the same window.

    > Note: Not everyone is aware that (in Internet Explorer, anyway) one can
    > right-click on a link and force it to open in a new window


    Not everyone will remain calm when the back button gets greyed out when they
    follow a link.

    --
    David Dorward <http://blog.dorward.me.uk/> <http://dorward.me.uk/>
    Home is where the ~/.bashrc is
     
    David Dorward, Jul 5, 2004
    #4
  5. Isidore

    Karl Groves Guest

    "Arondelle" <> wrote in message
    news:wRgGc.25313$...
    > Mitja wrote:
    >
    > > Opening new windows is in most cases not advised, however. It confuses

    the
    > > less experienced and infuriates the others.

    >
    > Not necessarily. If I were viewing a list of links, particularly a list
    > that I wanted to return to after viewing the subsequent link, I would
    > appreciate not having to reload the original page over and over, and
    > possibly lose it altogether if I were to get deeper into the link-to site.



    Good for you. That's why all browsers have "Open in a new window" as an
    option. Some *better* browsers can even facilitate tabbed browsing.
    So YOU can retain control of your browsing experience.

    The fact remains that most users hate new windows, are frustrated by them,
    and can completely get lost with them.

    -Karl
     
    Karl Groves, Jul 5, 2004
    #5
  6. Isidore

    m Guest

    On Mon, 05 Jul 2004 17:25:58 +0000, Isidore wrote:

    > I have a group of pages that are indexes of links to other page. Is
    > it possible to use css to make any link on one of these pages open in
    > new browser?
    >
    > What about if you also want some of those links (nav bar links) NOT
    > to open in a new browser?
    >


    XHTML strict has dropped
    the target attribute from its specification.
    This is because it breaks history to open a new window,
    and this has accessibility consequences. If you are using
    transitional versions you can use target at your own risk.

    In any case, you can still use scripting
    to open a new window:

    <a
    href="http://www.whatever.com"
    onclick="window.open('http://www.whatever.com');
    return false;"> THE LINK </a>
    ....which will be followed (in the same window)
    even if the browser has JavaScript
    turned off.

    This can even be done if an image is used as the link:

    <a href="x.jpg"
    onclick="window.open('x.jpg','flowerwin','width=500, height=406'); return
    false;"> <img src="images/1.jpg" width="50" height="41" alt="flower" />
    <br />(Image opens in a new window.)<br /></a>

    But I still consider it kludgy,
    inaccessible, and uglier than a baby allegator.

    Stay with the same window.
    --
    m http://www.mbstevens.com/howtothumb/
     
    m, Jul 5, 2004
    #6
  7. m wrote:

    > XHTML strict has dropped
    > the target attribute from its specification.


    No. HTML 4.01 Strict dropped the target attribute. XHTML 1.0 is just HTML
    4.01 expressed using XML rather then SGML.

    > This is because it breaks history to open a new window,
    > and this has accessibility consequences.


    No. This is becuase the target attribute says nothing about the data or its
    relationship to other data. (Which is not to say that the points you raise
    are not good reasons to avoid new windows, just the reason for target not
    appearing in Strict)

    --
    David Dorward <http://blog.dorward.me.uk/> <http://dorward.me.uk/>
    Home is where the ~/.bashrc is
     
    David Dorward, Jul 5, 2004
    #7
  8. David Dorward wrote:

    > m wrote:
    >
    >> XHTML strict has dropped
    >> the target attribute from its specification.

    >
    > No. HTML 4.01 Strict dropped the target attribute.


    Whoops - its more likely to be HTML 4.0 (which I haven't used) then 4.01
    (the bug fix release for 4.0).

    --
    David Dorward <http://blog.dorward.me.uk/> <http://dorward.me.uk/>
    Home is where the ~/.bashrc is
     
    David Dorward, Jul 5, 2004
    #8
  9. Isidore

    Webcastmaker Guest

    In article <ukgGc.6252$>,
    says...
    > > I have a group of pages that are indexes of links to other page. Is
    > > it possible to use css to make any link on one of these pages open in
    > > new browser?

    > CSS is about style, so no, you can't do it.
    > You can, however, use the link's target property and set it to "_blank". If
    > this is the desired behavior most of the time, have a look at the <base>
    > tag.
    > Opening new windows is in most cases not advised, however. It confuses the
    > less experienced and infuriates the others.


    A list of links is one of the places where I would consider _blank a
    good idea. ESPECIALLY if you mentioned that at the top of the page
    what is about to happen when they click on the link.

    --
    WebcastMaker
    The easiest and most affordable way to create
    Web casts, or put presentations on the Web.
    www.webentations.com
     
    Webcastmaker, Jul 5, 2004
    #9
  10. Isidore

    Webcastmaker Guest

    In article <ccc708$hfs$>,
    says...
    > The fact remains that most users hate new windows, are frustrated by them,
    > and can completely get lost with them.


    I think the fact is most users hate un-requested pop up windows.
    There is a huge difference.

    --
    WebcastMaker
    The easiest and most affordable way to create
    Web casts, or put presentations on the Web.
    www.webentations.com
     
    Webcastmaker, Jul 5, 2004
    #10
  11. Isidore

    m Guest

    David Dorward wrote:
    > David Dorward wrote:
    >
    >
    >>m wrote:
    >>
    >>
    >>>XHTML strict has dropped
    >>>the target attribute from its specification.

    >>
    >>No. HTML 4.01 Strict dropped the target attribute.

    >
    >
    > Whoops - its more likely to be HTML 4.0 (which I haven't used) then 4.01
    > (the bug fix release for 4.0).
    >


    'Whoops' happens when you hold yourself to too high a standard of
    literalism; however, I'm willing to concede the first point -- about
    'target' being dropped in HTML strict first -- if you also insist on '
    holding me to the same standard.
     
    m, Jul 5, 2004
    #11
  12. Isidore

    m Guest

    David Dorward wrote:
    > m wrote:


    > No. This is becuase the target attribute says nothing about the data or its
    > relationship to other data.


    This also appears to be a good reason for them to drop it. But I havn't
    seen any documentation as to what was going through the minds of the
    group that created the standard. It would make interesting reading.
     
    m, Jul 5, 2004
    #12
  13. On Mon, 05 Jul 2004 17:25:58 GMT, Isidore <> wrote:

    >I have a group of pages that are indexes of links to other page. Is
    >it possible to use css to make any link on one of these pages open in
    >new browser?


    Whatever anyone sais, don't do it! Such tags and scripts break the web
    philosophy of letting the end user have control of the decision to,
    for example, open a new window or tab depending on his browser and
    platform. Whenever a webdesigner starts to "think for the user" he
    usually fucks up browsing for a lot of people. Your job is to put
    content up on the web so that people can view it and not force their
    browser to do what you want it to do.

    If you could give us a link to your page with the index of links then
    together we can try to think of a better solution that works for
    everyone...

    Sincerely

    - Ransu, the web crusader
     
    Nameless Wildness, Jul 5, 2004
    #13
  14. Isidore

    Arondelle Guest

    Nameless Wildness wrote:
    > Whatever anyone sais, don't do it! Such tags and scripts break the web
    > philosophy of letting the end user have control of the decision to,
    > for example, open a new window or tab depending on his browser and
    > platform. Whenever a webdesigner starts to "think for the user" he
    > usually fucks up browsing for a lot of people. Your job is to put
    > content up on the web so that people can view it and not force their
    > browser to do what you want it to do.
    >
    > If you could give us a link to your page with the index of links then
    > together we can try to think of a better solution that works for
    > everyone...


    <rant>

    Where is it written that everyone should subscribe to a specific "web
    philosophy?" Who wrote this philosophy? What punishments will I incur
    if I don't follow this philosophy? Please post a link.

    It's like saying one should not post content unsuitable for children
    under the age of 13 or use words of more than two syllables, and thus
    bring the Web down to the lowest common denominator.

    Whatever happened to writing to an audience? Why do I have to create
    pages suitable for everyone? I bailed out of AOL because they had/have
    so many content restrictions for material published on their servers.

    I don't create pages for the mythical Everyone: No one *ever* ends up on
    my site by accident. I have a specific target audience, and know what
    they want, don't want and what they will put up with. For instance, a
    large number of my audience are well-used to content appearing in new
    windows, and some of them even open things in new windows by choice,
    regardless.

    (Not that I've taken the time to have things open in new windows, mind
    you, but I dislike being told that I will somehow trigger the wrath of
    God if I choose to.)

    </rant>

    Arondelle
    --
    ===========================================================
    To email me, empty the pond with a net
     
    Arondelle, Jul 5, 2004
    #14
  15. On Mon, 05 Jul 2004 21:56:39 GMT, Arondelle <>
    wrote:
    ><rant></rant>


    Simply what i mean by 'web philosophy' when it comes to html is being
    nice and considerate to the people who you think view your pages
    rather than try to think for them and impose things on them.

    Now that you are free from AOL nobody is imposing anything on you by
    reminding you that using non standard code will **** up browsing for a
    lot people. And certainly if you don't care about such things than you
    are bound to get the wrath of those people upon you.

    - Ransu, the web crusader
     
    Nameless Wildness, Jul 5, 2004
    #15
  16. Isidore

    Karl Groves Guest

    "Webcastmaker" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    > In article <ccc708$hfs$>,
    > says...
    > > The fact remains that most users hate new windows, are frustrated by

    them,
    > > and can completely get lost with them.

    >
    > I think the fact is most users hate un-requested pop up windows.
    > There is a huge difference.


    No, there isn't.

    -Karl
     
    Karl Groves, Jul 5, 2004
    #16
  17. Isidore

    Arondelle Guest

    Nameless Wildness wrote:
    > Now that you are free from AOL nobody is imposing anything on you by
    > reminding you that using non standard code will **** up browsing for a
    > lot people. And certainly if you don't care about such things than you
    > are bound to get the wrath of those people upon you.


    Does bad html go out and screw up random browsers like a virus? I think
    not. I use standard code 99.9% of the time because I'm not a
    sufficiently skilled programmer to try to do anything cute, so the point
    is moot.

    Furthermore, if "those people" get wrathful, they won't come back and
    I'll never know the difference. I'm not particularly worried about
    people who wouldn't visit my site anyway.

    I just want to know who the Coding Cops are, and if you're one of them.

    Arondelle
    --
    ===========================================================
    To email me, empty the pond with a net
     
    Arondelle, Jul 6, 2004
    #17
  18. Isidore

    brucie Guest

    in post: <news:r8kGc.23362$>
    Arondelle <> said:

    > Where is it written that everyone should subscribe to a specific "web
    > philosophy?"


    trying to annoy your visitors as little as possible is common sense, not
    a philosophy.

    > </rant>


    it wasn't a very good one. i want to see much more swearing next time.


    --
    b r u c i e
     
    brucie, Jul 6, 2004
    #18
  19. Isidore

    Webcastmaker Guest

    In article <>,
    says...
    > Whatever anyone sais, don't do it! Such tags and scripts break the web
    > philosophy of letting the end user have control of the decision to,
    > for example, open a new window or tab depending on his browser and
    > platform. Whenever a webdesigner starts to "think for the user" he
    > usually fucks up browsing for a lot of people. Your job is to put
    > content up on the web so that people can view it and not force their
    > browser to do what you want it to do.


    <cough>horse shit</cough>

    There are many uses for the web.
    --
    WebcastMaker
    The easiest and most affordable way to create
    Web casts, or put presentations on the Web.
    www.webentations.com
     
    Webcastmaker, Jul 6, 2004
    #19
  20. Isidore

    Webcastmaker Guest

    In article <r8kGc.23362$>, aron.delle3
    @verizon.pond says...
    > Where is it written that everyone should subscribe to a specific "web
    > philosophy?"

    It's not

    > Who wrote this philosophy?

    No one

    > What punishments will I incur
    > if I don't follow this philosophy?

    Well depending on the goals and content of the site (say a site like
    google) you could incur a loss of visitors. But each site is
    different, so different things work on different sites.

    > Whatever happened to writing to an audience?

    It is lost in the logic of some in this group. Some belive that no
    one on the web can have a target audience, and that all websites
    should be for all people. It is a waste of time arguing this point.
    State you disagree, then let the thread die a simple death.

    > Why do I have to create
    > pages suitable for everyone?


    You don't, but many in this group disagree. Let it die...

    --
    WebcastMaker
    The easiest and most affordable way to create
    Web casts, or put presentations on the Web.
    www.webentations.com
     
    Webcastmaker, Jul 6, 2004
    #20
    1. Advertising

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

It takes just 2 minutes to sign up (and it's free!). Just click the sign up button to choose a username and then you can ask your own questions on the forum.
Similar Threads
  1. =?Utf-8?B?Tm92aWNl?=
    Replies:
    2
    Views:
    6,718
    Alan Ferrandiz Langley
    Jun 9, 2004
  2. Matt
    Replies:
    2
    Views:
    14,185
    bruce barker
    Aug 23, 2004
  3. Matt
    Replies:
    1
    Views:
    478
    Andrew Thompson
    Aug 22, 2004
  4. Matt
    Replies:
    5
    Views:
    3,068
    Michael Winter
    Aug 25, 2004
  5. Gordon
    Replies:
    3
    Views:
    342
    Steven Burn
    Apr 16, 2004
Loading...

Share This Page