target="_blank"

[Jose]

How many pages are you going to have that on? If one, no big deal in

the extra text required; if more, you surely aren't getting your
message across. If you need to give that simple of instruction many
times, I'd rethink either the instruction or the learning ability of
those I'm instructing.

I don't know whether people reach a given page directly or through the
home page, so I imagine 'Trick click to open in a new window' would be
on every page that had links for which this would be useful (which is
maybe six out of twenty).

Jose

 

[Rob McAninch]

Jose>:

I don't know whether people reach a given page directly or through the
home page

Seldom through the homepage, for the typical site.

so I imagine 'Trick click to open in a new window' would be
on every page that had links for which this would be useful (which is
maybe six out of twenty).

I wouldn't bother adding this to the pages. To make it noticeable
you would likely distract from the content of the page. And 'trick
clicking' works differently for different devices anyhow.

You might write a tutorial on the subject as its own page and then
try to publicize it to teach the web at large. But throwing even a
link to it in the introductory to your 'main' content doesn't sound
like a good idea.

One thought is that a user who doesn't already know how to open a
new window/tab may well be confused if you do it for him.

 

[Jose]

And 'trick clicking' works differently for different devices anyhow.

Which is why "trick click" would be a link of some sort, to an
explanation elsewhere. So, what's the best "elsewhere"? I want users
to be able to just see the brief explanation without leaving the site
(and having to come back and reload it after reading three lines of
text), or being afraid that is what would happen. OTOH I don't want to
load a new instance of a browser on somebody who may not want it or know
what just happened.

Jose

 

[Stan McCann]

I don't know whether people reach a given page directly or through
the home page, so I imagine 'Trick click to open in a new window'
would be on every page that had links for which this would be useful
(which is maybe six out of twenty).

That's not a large percentage and being an instructional aide, the
text is perfectly appropriate to tell the user what is going to
happen. This would make opening a window appropriate. I still stand
by, in normal usage, opening a new window should not be done. It
annoys me, and I'd guess a large proportion of people browsing to have
to go close that extra unwanted window. Those links go largely
unnoticed now using FF and extensions that limit the ability to open a
new window without notice.

 

[Rob McAninch]

Jose>:

Which is why "trick click" would be a link of some sort, to an
explanation elsewhere.

Perhaps a small text banner:

"Read my article on Efficient Browser Usage"

Even the phrase 'trick click' may not have relevance or meaning.
I've never heard "right clicking" referred to as 'trick clicking'
until this discussion. (And I say right clicking due to my MS
Windows heritage.)

To explain on a system by system (platform, os, browser, pointing
device) would take consider space to explain. Or you can just say,
e.g. for the typical MS user right-click... For the typical Mac user ...

But what happens when they're not typical or get confused? What
happens to the PDA or mobile phone users who get annoyed by your
waste of their limited screen space explaining something that
doesn't apply to them?

IMHO a 'context click' is a basic UI feature that a user is either
going to learn elsewhere (unless UI design and computer usage is
your topic) or they don't know what they're missing.

 

[Jose]

I've never heard "right clicking" referred to as 'trick clicking' until this discussion.

.... because it's not always right-clicking. In Windows IE shift-click
opens a new page, in Windows Netscape it's control-click, but on both
right-click brings up a menu (another step)... on the Mac there is no
right-click... and on some systems there is no click.

But what happens when they're not typical or get confused?

Then they ignore me and reuse the window. And use the back button.

IMHO a 'context click' is a basic UI feature that a user is either going to learn elsewhere (unless UI design and computer usage is your topic) or they don't know what they're missing.

"elsewhere" is always "somewhere".

Jose

 

[Jose]

It' very easy to solve. Don't open windows for users. If users want

to open in new windows, they will learn how if they don't already know.

Do you have the same opinion of PDF files? If a link is a link to a
PDF, would you expect people to be re-oriented to an application
(Acrobat) as opposed to the browser, and then close (POOF!) the window
when they are done, taking them off the web totally? If so, a new
window might be the way to go. Do you still hold that users should
proactively make that choice in this case?

Jose

 

[Nick Theodorakis]

Do you have the same opinion of PDF files? If a link is a link to a
PDF, would you expect people to be re-oriented to an application
(Acrobat) as opposed to the browser, and then close (POOF!) the window
when they are done, taking them off the web totally? If so, a new
window might be the way to go. Do you still hold that users should
proactively make that choice in this case?

Two things:

(1) Not all browsers are configured to open a PDF in the browser
window; some will launch an external application. In that case, the
user will end up with a useless, blank extra window.

(2) Some people (as myself) often prefer to download a PDF file for
later viewing.

Nick

 

[Alan J. Flavell]

Do you have the same opinion of PDF files?

When a web site offers me a PDF file, it's entirely *my* choice
whether I choose to open it within a browser window (plugin), in a
separate window (PDF viewer invoked as helper application), or
download it to disk for later perusal.

That's how the web was meant to work, and that's how I use it. I
don't appreciate having choices taken away from me by web site authors
and their henchmen.

 

[Jose]

(1) Not all browsers are configured to open a PDF in the browser

window; some will launch an external application. In that case, the
user will end up with a useless, blank extra window.

Yeah, I've seen that. But instead of the target tag, how about
a header line
"Content-disposition: Attachment" and maybe
"; filename=somefile.pdf" after that

Also, where would this header go?

(2) Some people (as myself) often prefer to download a PDF file for
later viewing.

That option remains if you trick-click. I would just alter the default
behavior.

Jose

 

[Jose]

When a web site offers me a PDF file, it's entirely *my* choice

whether I choose to open it within a browser window (plugin), in a
separate window (PDF viewer invoked as helper application), or
download it to disk for later perusal.

That's not how Netscape 7.2 works. If I don't specify anything in the
website, and click on a link with N7.2, the PDF opens in the browser
window, taking forever as all the pieces of acrobat load, and preventing
me from saying "Nooooo! Stop it!" and going back to the original page.
(Well, I can say it but it won't do any good!). Having done this too
many times, I was motivated to find away to avoid injuring other
viewers, and opening a new window (which can be closed instantly if the
user didn't really mean to waken Acrobat from its slumber) was the
lesser evil.

Interestingly, an excel file opens Excel if browsed from Netscape, but
it opens from within an IE window by default, which means that some
viewers are stuck with browser chrome, and others are not.

Jose

 

[Rob McAninch]

<:

Jose, if you can, get your newsreader to attribute quotes to the
person that made them as you see above and the one I added below.
It's just standard practice.

When a web site offers me a PDF file, it's entirely *my*
choice [...]

Here's a fairly recent article.
http://www.useit.com/alertbox/open_new_windows.html

He actually encourages new window use. Of course he does say "Best
of all, *prevent the browser from opening the document* in the
first place."

The content-disposition headers are mentioned. Those are sent from
the server when a PDF is requested. While it does prevent someone
from using the Acrobat plugin, I agree with Nielsen in this case,
in that it improves usability.

I've personally closed the browser window after following a PDF
link (and closed several tabs with it. Grrr.)

That's not how Netscape 7.2 works.

You should be able to de-install the Adobe plugin and add Acrobat
as a helper application. That should allow you to open it in a
separate application. I typically save the PDF and open it
locally. Even with a 256kbs DSL some large PDFs are slow over the
network.

Interestingly, an excel file opens Excel if browsed from
Netscape, but it opens from within an IE window by default,
which means that some viewers are stuck with browser chrome,
and others are not.

Gotta love that M$ integration... ;-) Most MS Office documents
open within IE, AFAIK. I'm wondering if IE will obey a content-
disposition header for an Office document.

 

[Jukka K. Korpela]

Here's a fairly recent article.
http://www.useit.com/alertbox/open_new_windows.html

He actually encourages new window use.

For PDF and other "non-Web" documents, as an exception to Nielsen's strong
and well-argumented recommendation of not opening new windows.

But even in this restricted meaning, the advice is wrong. What the user needs
is a warning about the data format - at the minimum, "(PDF)" after the link.
This is relevant for several reasons, including the fact that not all people
can and not all people want to open PDF documents in the first place.
Moreover, it lets the user know what to expect if he follows the link
and make an informed decision on _how_ to open it.

It does not solve the problem that everyone needs to meet a PDF document on
the Web for the first time in his life and learn what to do with PDF
documents. (On my first time, it was an awful confusion, with strange
controls and no apparent way to actually use the document.) Opening a PDF
document in a new window by default would not solve that problem either; it
would add a new minor ingredient to the problem.

 

[Jose]

The content-disposition headers are mentioned. Those are sent from

the server when a PDF is requested.

How do I get the server to send certain headers?

Jose

 

[Alan J. Flavell]

How do I get the server to send certain headers?

Finding what it is and reading the corresponding documentation is said
to be quite useful.

Apache has several different ways that you can use (assuming that your
server admin hasn't blocked them).

 

[Stan McCann]

Do you have the same opinion of PDF files? If a link is a link to a
PDF, would you expect people to be re-oriented to an application
(Acrobat) as opposed to the browser, and then close (POOF!) the
window when they are done, taking them off the web totally? If so,
a new window might be the way to go. Do you still hold that users
should proactively make that choice in this case?

Jose

Yes, I have the same opinion for pdf files. They should be clearly
labeled as pdf so they can be downloaded and printed. A pdf is NOT
meant to be displayed in a web browser; it is a great way to print a
file though. See http://www.webpagesthatsuck.com/pdf.html. I use
FireFox with an extension that brings up the download box for any pdf.
I don't view pdfs in a web browser.

 

[Stan McCann]

Interestingly, an excel file opens Excel if browsed from Netscape,
but it opens from within an IE window by default, which means that
some viewers are stuck with browser chrome, and others are not.

Not on my Linux system or on my laptop that I don't have Office
installed on. In both cases, I get a download prompt.

 

[Jonathan N. Little]

Not on my Linux system or on my laptop that I don't have Office
installed on. In both cases, I get a download prompt.

The point Stan is making here is all depends on how your system and
browser is configured. Excel file downloads if in Netscape and I have
Office, but I have Netscape/Mozilla/Firefox to save to file not open
with default application

 

[Nick Theodorakis]

[...]

Yes, I have the same opinion for pdf files. They should be clearly
labeled as pdf so they can be downloaded and printed. A pdf is NOT
meant to be displayed in a web browser; it is a great way to print a
file though.

Unless the PDF is formatted for US Letter (8.5 in x 11 in) and your
printer is loaded with A4, or vice versa.

Nick

 

[=?ISO-8859-1?Q?G=E9rard_Talbot?=]

Jake wrote :

It's fine -- other than the fact that you can't use it and still
validate your HTML as 'STRICT'.

Still, that may not be an issue for you. If it is, then you'll need to
use javascript to provide the functionality.





Sure. It's a major problem for people with less than 15 minutes exposure
to the Web.

If it really was an issue, then browser manufacturers would provide a
setting to override the spawning of a new window -- forcing the target
to be the existing window.

Netscape 7 was the first to introduce a feature which was overriding
target="_blank" and which was forcing the target to be the existing
window. See for yourself:
Open a link in a new window: when and how can that setting affect my
surfing?
http://www.gtalbot.org/Netscape7Section/Popup/PopupAndNetscape7.html#OpenLinkNewWindow

NS 7.x, Mozilla 1.x, Firefox 1.x, K-meleon (and all Gecko-based
browsers; recent versions) have the ability to override target="_blank"

Target semantic in HTML 4.01
"User agents may provide users with a mechanism to override the target
attribute."
http://www.w3.org/TR/html401/present/frames.html#h-16.3.2

I have made that same feature request to MSIE 7 dev. team . I also
requested a modification in the way target attribute currently works in
order to compensate some of the actual way it works. See
1-
"Focusing a secondary window and the target attribute"
at
http://channel9.msdn.com/wiki/default.aspx/Channel9.InternetExplorerFeatureRequests

and

2- Last bullet item of section "HTML 4 Support and spec violations"
at
Internet Explorer Standards Support
http://channel9.msdn.com/wiki/default.aspx/Channel9.InternetExplorerStandardsSupport

Fine. That's what I'd do; seems to be quite a common practice.

(It often annoys me when I take a link to another site only to find that
the page's author has been too lazy to open a new window for me.)



Just warn your users that links to eternal sites open in a new browser
window.

Just like WAI and J. Nielsen and other accessibility/usability groups
have been recommending. It's ok to propose the user to open a link in a
new window and to warn him in advance of that (when clicking a link).
It's not ok to try to force the opening of new window despite and
against the user's will.

I notice that a number of authors are now starting to append an icon to
a link that opens in a new window,

Always identify links which will create (or will re-use) a new,
secondary window
http://developer.mozilla.org/en/doc...28or_will_re-use.29_a_new.2C_secondary_window

with quotes, references, icons, even cursors for that purpose

with both 'alt' and 'title' text on

the <img> informing the user of the fact.

I do that on the link. It should not be done on the <img> but rather on
the <a>, actually.

Gérard