 sj |
||
|
||
Blue Clicky Thing - A New Standard?
|
|
|
Subject: Blue Clicky Thing - A New Standard? From: Mick Lowe Date: 24 May 99 - 06:41 AM I admit I was dead chuffed when I first discovered how to create a link to another site within a thread using the HTML command a href= etc. However I have found myself becoming more and more annoyed as I read through postings which have the blue clicky thing, especially when I don't want to visit the linked site before reading through all the other threads posted. I know I could click on view/source but that wastes precious online minutes, thanks to the dinosaur of a pc I have, Could I suggest then we adopt as a standard, that when we do use the blue clicky thing for a link, we also type the URl for those wishing just to make a note of it for future reference. Mick |
|
Subject: RE: Blue Clicky Thing - A New Standard? From: Banjer Date: 24 May 99 - 06:49 AM Sometimes typing a URL can lead to trouble by way of missed letters, etc. How about do as I do, continue reading the rest of the thread, and if there is time and yun want to, go back to the message with the "Blue Clicky Thing" and click on it? I understand what Mick is saying, but with all the punctuation and odd letters in many URL's I would not feel comfortable typing them in. One could, I suppose, cut and paste a URL......Hmmmm... |
|
Subject: RE: Blue Clicky Thing - A New Standard? From: Mick Lowe Date: 24 May 99 - 06:56 AM Hi Banjer I know what you mean re tying (whoops typing.. bad pun) mistakes. But having typed the URl already to create the blue clicky thing, it shouldn't be too hard to repeat it without the accompanying a href and quotation marks For example:- BLUE CLICKY THING this site is www.prof.co.uk/irish1.htm If you get my drift Cheers Mick |
|
Subject: RE: Blue Clicky Thing - A New Standard? From: MMario Date: 24 May 99 - 08:00 AM sound good and logical to me....expecially since I suspect that most of the "blue clicky things" are put in with "cut and paste" anyway. MMario |
|
Subject: RE: Blue Clicky Thing - A New Standard? From: Alice Date: 24 May 99 - 09:00 AM But what if the URL is veeerrry loooong? That may be annoying, too. I see your point, but sometimes it would be appropriate, and sometimes it may ruin the elegance of having the blue clicky. I'll try to use your suggestion in the future, if it helps with the slow computers and time/expenses being online. When my computer was down, I would sometimes be able to get online at the library, but often it was on the 'fifteen minutes only' stations. Hardly time to read email and check the Mudcat.(and yes, copy-paste is always the way to go with links.) |
|
Subject: RE: Blue Clicky Thing - A New Standard? From: Tony Burns Date: 24 May 99 - 10:05 AM I avoid the problem of losing the thread by right clicking on the blue clicky thing and then selecting 'Open in a new window'. That's the way you do it in Netscape. The method may vary with other browsers. |
|
Subject: RE: Blue Clicky Thing - A New Standard? From: Jeri Date: 24 May 99 - 10:55 AM In MSIE and Netscape (Windows), if you hold the mouse over the blue clicky thing (without clicking), the address appears down at the bottom of the screen. Or you can right click on the BCT and select "properties" to see the address. |
|
Subject: RE: Blue Clicky Thing - A New Standard? From: Alan of Australia Date: 24 May 99 - 11:34 AM G'day, I also use Tony Burns' method. It also works in MSIE 4. Actually, although I create blue clicky thingies, it's not a big deal if you don't. As long as the URL is listed, it's easy to copy & paste to the address window.
Cheers, |
|
Subject: RE: Blue Clicky Thing - A New Standard? From: SingsIrish Songs Date: 24 May 99 - 12:14 PM Great idea, Mick! Makes sense to do the copy and paste twice...once without the HTML coding...that way, if you already know the site, you don't have to waste time going to it, you can ID the URL, but not necessarily on the QT. (Bad joke) Now why didn't I think of this??? Mary |
|
Subject: RE: Blue Clicky Thing - A New Standard? From: Margo Date: 24 May 99 - 12:26 PM Great thread! I'm learning more about my computer all the time! I usually do go back later and read links if I want to. Margarita |
|
Subject: RE: Blue Clicky Thing - A New Standard? From: The Shambles Date: 24 May 99 - 12:36 PM Jeri's point seemed to answer the promlem. Unless there are browsers that don't show the URL when you place the mouse on it. But it not too much trouble to paste twice. |
|
Subject: RE: Blue Clicky Thing - A New Standard? From: Mick Lowe Date: 24 May 99 - 06:08 PM I'd thought I would wait to see what response this got before delivering coup de grace (however it's spelt).. In that the real reason I decided it would be nice to adopt this "standard" is because if like me, you save to disk, an entire thread as a text file for later perusal off-line, the good old blue clicky thing and all the mouse waving you want, is as much use as trying to push snowballs uphill with a blowlamp... Candidate for the Idle Party Mick |
|
Subject: RE: Blue Clicky Thing - A New Standard? From: Jeri Date: 24 May 99 - 06:20 PM You could save it as HTML, and the blue clicky things would work when you were on line. It's probably easier to do than to save it as text. |
|
Subject: RE: Blue Clicky Thing - A New Standard? From: Joe Offer Date: 24 May 99 - 07:48 PM Some nasty DOS Luddite soundly criticized me a while back for posting links instead of displaying the URL as text. It kind of hurt my feelings, since I thought I was doing a favor by making it easy for people to jump to other sites. If I put the link in once, then a hundred people can avoid cut-and-pasting to get to the other site - and they just might be more likely to go to the other site. People who want the actual URL can get it with a single mouse-click, or they can save the page as HTML if they want to view it offline. I suppose we could paste the URL in a second time as the reference word for the link, but that makes the text harder to read. I kind of like to see how many novel ways I can say click here. So I, for one, don't see any reason for a rule. Who comes up with all these suggestions for rules, andyhow? Is it the same people who have a compulsion to post things like the "Clean as you go" signs the U.S. Army used to have above urinals? I think that our elegant anarchy is one of the many wonderful things about Mudcat. Let's not spoil it with rules, eh? I hope you don't mind my teasing a bit, Mick. -Joe Offer- |
|
Subject: RE: Blue Clicky Thing - A New Standard? From: Mick Lowe Date: 24 May 99 - 08:31 PM Joe I don't mind you teasing one bit.. Although I should stress that standards are not the same as rules. I am also now intrigued as to what goes on in the US Army.. Having neither been in the US or the army I have a mental image of "Clean as you go" being the motto for those wonderful guys who man the snow ploughs during inclemant weather So okay.. I didn't want to get heavy with you guys, but seeing as how you are putting up a bit of a fight I had better lay it on the line to you. Hands up those of you are web site designers?.. I count one.. is it two?... The thing is that as we get more and more sophisticated in stretching HTML to it's limits .. the latest craze being Frames (yes I use them on my site)... we shouldn't forget all those "unfortunate" people whose browsers/hardware can not support such innovations.. so you should cater/provide a fall back that allows them access via an alternative route... Hence it would not hurt us to adopt a similar policy regarding the posting of threads to this illustrious of sites... Basically.. you can't beat being simple.. ask any Blues player... Having got on the soap box.. this doesn't only apply to the blue clicky thing but to anything else we post.... point in question being the thread about MP3 (ignorance showing and valid point made).. I hadn't got a clue what this thread was about.. I had a good mentor viz writing "technical reports" a few years back... his philosophy was.. "Always start from the standpoint that your readers know nothing, then put forward your idea/view without being condescending".. It ain't easy, but if you can do it, it works like a dream Mick |
|
Subject: RE: Blue Clicky Thing - A New Standard? From: Jeri Date: 24 May 99 - 08:47 PM Mick, I don't understand how saving a file as HTML is more complicated than saving it as text It does take up more space - maybe that's the problem? It seems simpler to me to have a blue clicky thing that works than to open a text file, highlight a URL, hit "copy," open your web browser, paste the text, and hit "enter." As far as some people's browsers not being able to handle HTML - is that possible, or did I misunderstand you? |
|
Subject: RE: Blue Clicky Thing - A New Standard? From: Bill D Date: 25 May 99 - 02:09 AM well...you CAN do almost anything you want with the HTML links..('blue clicky thing' remings me of the lady who once asked me if I had gone to my 'Blue String Pluckin' Thingy') here is an address..of the park where the Washington Folk Festival is held...http://www.nps.gov/glec/caro/carmusic.htm ...and here it is with just Glen Echo Park> as the blue part...same link.. and here is the address without 'live' link http://www.nps.gov/glec/caro/carmusic.htm ...all copied & pasted in about 12 seconds flat..it can be copied, bookmarked, clicked on, ...whatever...there IS a short learning curve to getting the hang of how to deal with 'em...but IF it is correct, you can make it into any form you wish in just a few seconds....honest..! |
|
Subject: RE: Blue Clicky Thing - A New Standard? From: Wolfgang Date: 26 May 99 - 10:50 AM The only thing I don't like about several of the 'blue clicky thingies' lately was the very uninformative title 'blue clicky thingy'. It doesn't matter if the sentence says: lyrics found with the 'Blue Clicky Thingy', but it matters if I read a sentence like, e.g., you might want to 'click here', for I have to click and wait to find out whether I'd rather have not clicked. In short, be as informative as possible. Wolfgang |
|
Subject: RE: Blue Clicky Thing - A New Standard? From: The Shambles Date: 26 May 99 - 01:31 PM I like the surprise element myself................. It's like going on a mystery tour. |
|
Subject: RE: Blue Clicky Thing - A New Standard? From: Joe Offer Date: 26 May 99 - 02:31 PM My Pentium 133 with 32 MB of RAM is getting a little sluggish on 1999 software, but it still works pretty well with two or three browser windows open. You can open a new browser window from your "file" menu or by pressing CTRL-N, or by selecting "open in new window" when you right-click on a link. Working with two or three browsers is especially helpful when you are creating links in Mudcat. You have one browser open for the Mudcat thread where you want to post a message, and then you navigate to the target page with one of the other browser windows. When you get where you want, highlight and copy [CTRL-C] the link from the address bar, and then paste it into your link on the forum message (the target URL goes into the RED part of the example below). I know that HTML standards require quotation marks within links, but they almost always work very well without quotes and links without quotes are less prone to have mistakes. -Joe Offer-
|
|
Subject: RE: Blue Clicky Thing - A New Standard? From: Bill D Date: 27 May 99 - 12:27 AM exactly right, Joe...opening an extra browser window is one of the easiest ways to follow things and not get lost...and...just as 'alt-tab' takes you thru all the open windows on your computer..'ctrl-tab' flips between only the browser windows!!....you can post...read lyrics on another site...whatever (I often open 2 copies of Mudcat, so I can avoid re-loading big threads as I read the various parts) |
|
Subject: RE: Blue Clicky Thing - A New Standard? From: MudGuard Date: 27 May 99 - 01:01 AM Joe, I am sorry I have to tell you the standard does not always require quotes in. It requires them if the URL contains blanks and a few other characters which I don't remember right now. The same applies to most text parameters Andreas |
|
Subject: RE: Blue Clicky Thing - A New Standard? From: Helen Date: 27 May 99 - 05:08 AM Mick, I can see your point. It's easy and quick enough to make a clicky thing, and paste the URL if you are doing all of it by cut and paste, so why not make it easy for everyone rather than just for some people. That's the philosophy behind the clicky thing on websites which says "If your browser doesn't support frames please click here" I just cut and paste Joe's blue and red line of html, save it in my e-mail in a folder called "keep these" so I don't delete them by mistake. I then copy the line into the thread, copy the URL from either my bookmarks (Netscape) of Favourites (Explorer) folders, or the site itself. The nice thing about cut-and-pasting Joe's html is that I can be descriptive instead of just saying "click here' by typing over the text, but I'll confess so far I haven't been descriptive about the name of the site or anything. In fact, I guess you could paste the URL address over "click here" if you wanted and then select and copy the text if you need to. That might be complicating things though. Helen |
|
Subject: RE: Blue Clicky Thing - A New Standard? From: Ferrara Date: 27 May 99 - 07:21 AM I think I'm in favor of Mick's suggestion for adding the URL after the Blue Clicky Thing, for lots of reasons. One, I'm a very conservative User of Computers (just ask Roger in Baltimore, who keeps trying to get us to upgrade our hardware from steam-driven to the new early-20th-century AA-battery-powered model!) and I don't WANT to save threads as HTML. I was a computer analyst for 28 years and employers and clients were constantly asking me to learn a new piece of software in a backbreakingly short time frame. I HATE learning new software. Then too, we have been really broke since my original heart problems got disabling, and we can't buy software. Period. [Correction -- we did buy virus detection software this week, after four weeks without being able to use Windows.] We still use Write for our word processor, because it's too expensive to buy MSWord or Word Perfect. And when I really want to remember what's in a thread, I copy it into Write, along with whatever song, etc it's referring to. Sometimes I even *print* it, horror of horrors! (Before roasting my fresh-skinned antelope over an open fire, wrapping myself in untanned furs, and going to sleep in the back of the cave.) And I can well see how useful it would be to have URL's embedded, in clear text, right there in front of me. I've wished for it sometimes. (Especially now that Max has upgraded the site to the point where my old computer can't manage a Forum search.) But usually my strategy is to clicky on the blue thing, right away, and bookmark the site if I like it, then return to the thread. Anyway, it would be useful to know if adding the URL's would be really useful to anyone besides Mick. Second, it doesn't hurt anything. Joe, I feel it's easy enough to slip a URL into the text gracefully, so it doesn't hurt the flow of the thread. The question is, does anyone besides Mick need it or want it? If not, people who add links could still include the URL as a courtesy to Mick if they want to, but, Mick, I can't see it becoming a standard. Please note -- I woke up at four and couldn't get back to sleep, so maybe sound a teensy bit grumpier than usual? Sorry. - Rita Ferrara |
|
Subject: RE: Blue Clicky Thing - A New Standard? From: Jeri Date: 27 May 99 - 09:48 AM I really don't have a problem posting the URL as text at the same time I do a blue clicky thing. It takes less than a second to hit "paste" a second time.
And right now, I'm listening to "Folk Roots and Folk Branches" on KCUT (Thursdays, 9-11AM EST) at:
KCUT RealAudio |
|
Subject: RE: Blue Clicky Thing - A New Standard? From: Allan C. Date: 27 May 99 - 10:24 AM I am with Wolfgang on this. I really like a little more information than simply "Click Here". Rather than the "Click" message, a brief description of the site could be used. Like: Picture of Southern Copperhead This gives folks an opportunity to decide as to whether they want to see a picture of a snake. But I agree also with others that it is a simple matter of a click to paste the URL: http://gto.ncsa.uiuc.edu/pingleto/herps/images/snakes/contortrix1.jpg I mean, it isn't any real trouble to accomplish and what harm can it do? |
|
Subject: RE: Blue Clicky Thing - A New Standard? From: Bert Date: 27 May 99 - 10:38 AM Personally I like the text as well so's I can cut and paste it and email it to someone else. So I'll try to remember to add it myself in future. Bert. |
|
Subject: RE: Blue Clicky Thing - A New Standard? From: SingsIrish Songs Date: 27 May 99 - 03:45 PM I like the idea of including the URL as text. Two options that have been mentioned above: 1) paste the URL in the "click here" portion of the link 2) give a more descriptive label to the "click here" portion and give the URL as text after. I find it annoying to "click here" when there is no real description of the link and find I've "been there/done that" or am totally not interested. Sometimes I just don't bother. When I save to disk, unless it is something phenomenal, I try to save as text. I don't always want to grab a pencil/pen and scratch the URL down on paper...I am always losing things! So to have the URL spelled out somewhere in the thread would be helpful. Good thread! Lots of ideas as well. When it comes to URL's, the more info about it the better I say. Mary |
|
Subject: RE: Blue Clicky Thing - A New Standard? From: Mick Lowe Date: 27 May 99 - 07:54 PM I am now going to annoy anyone outside the UK (heck I just feel like it...) By saying I think this is a case of the "Cocco-Pops" winning. I don't have a problem saving threads as HTML.. I just don't want to...Saving them as text files means I can delete all the unwanted stuff and still view them in notepad (which loads a hell of a lot quicker then I.E.) I think Helen hit the nail.. re the frames issue. Giving an alternative in case your viewing public either can't or don't want to access your information/link via your primary route is not only good computer practice.. but polite Okay anyone having visited my site I'm working on a "non-frames" version so bear with me End of soap box.... Mick |
|
Subject: RE: Blue Clicky Thing - A New Standard? From: Bill D Date: 27 May 99 - 11:14 PM oh...sure, NOW I get it!! here is The end...and face, of a SoapBox! http://www.mopoke.demon.co.uk/soapbox/smallsoap.jpg |
|
Subject: RE: Blue Clicky Thing - A New Standard? From: Mudjack Date: 27 Aug 99 - 12:54 PM This is a test of my skill at doing blue clickey things: |
| Share Thread: |
