4 ms·

And if every link is just "Amaya" without verbs you can't tell what's what. So I think "get Amaya" and "go to the Amaya website" are rather fine. Also poor for

And if every link is just "Amaya" without verbs you can't tell what's what. So I think "get Amaya" and "go to the Amaya website" are rather fine. Also poor form is to have your download button on github.io pulling an executable from malware sites like sourceforge. I'm looking at you wxMaxima.

rvnx 1y ago
[flagged]
- ceejayoz 1y ago
  Describing bundled adware as "fostering a sustainable ecosystem" while portraying Chrome as "forced malware" is a hell of a take.
  - rvnx 1y ago
    Of course I exaggerated it on purpose, but think about it: Remember, in ~2010, it was a trend to add toolbars to Internet Explorer (it was called BHO I think?) These toolbars were changing the search engine for Bing, Yahoo, etc. This is why they were called "Yahoo toolbar". But then, came Chrome, which was bundled among other in: - Adobe Flash Player updates - Java Runtime Environment (via Oracle) - CCleaner - Avast and AVG installers - Many download portals (e.g., Softonic, CNET Download.com, SourceForge) So, the objective of Chrome, instead of replacing the search engine with a toolbar, it was to do it by installing a new app, but this is exactly the same goal. At the end, the goal of Google was not the save the web, it was to replace the search engine and display ads on these pages (+ make sure that the targeting + rendering is under their control).
    - ceejayoz 1y ago
      The toolbars were bad, too.
- wussboy 1y ago
  I feel like negative opinions are facts.
- StableAlkyne 1y ago
  If an ecosystem can't be maintained without bundling malware (adware is by definition malware), then maybe that ecosystem shouldn't exist.
raincole 1y ago
Go to the [Amaya Website](www.amaya.com) is perfectly fine. I seriously have a hard time understanding what this w3.org article is trying to say. A website is a website. To download is to download. The mechanics won't be 'abstracted away' just because you don't call them with the proper terms.
- joelfried 1y ago
  In 2001 websites weren't what they are today. It was 5 years before jQuery's initial release . . . people needed to learn the proper terms somewhere in those days.
  - bornfreddy 1y ago
    I can assure that there were good and bad pages then, the same as there are good and awful pages today.
    - bandrami 1y ago
      There are good pages today?
- jchw 1y ago
  I don't think it's suggesting "Amaya website" is an incorrect or bad phrase in and of itself, I think it's just using the different passages to show how they'd prefer you style links in hypertext. These days I don't think you'd find many people following this style guide, but I think I understand what they're going for. They seem to be making the prose neutral to the technical details; after all, if you're keyboard navigating, maybe you're not "clicking" per-se. Maybe the pages are printed onto paper, etc.
  - raincole 1y ago
    I do agree "Click Here" is bad because you need to read the context to know what "Here" is, and for the accessibility reason my GP mentioned.
jchw 1y ago
I don't think this recommendation is suggesting it would be any better to do that; having a bunch of different links be just Amaya would be wrong too. If you had this situation you'd probably want to carefully choose different selections, e.g. "get [Amaya]", "Amaya [documentation]", etc. If you need to disambiguate or further clarify links, well, you should also set the title attributes too. That ought to help.
oneeyedpigeon 1y ago
> And if every link is just "Amaya" without verbs you can't tell what's what. I'm pretty sure the W3C is not recommending you do that. If you link to the Amaya website, link on the text "Amaya". If you're linking to something else Amaya-related, modify the link text appropriately.

rvnx 1y ago

[flagged]

ceejayoz 1y ago
Describing bundled adware as "fostering a sustainable ecosystem" while portraying Chrome as "forced malware" is a hell of a take.
- rvnx 1y ago
  Of course I exaggerated it on purpose, but think about it: Remember, in ~2010, it was a trend to add toolbars to Internet Explorer (it was called BHO I think?) These toolbars were changing the search engine for Bing, Yahoo, etc. This is why they were called "Yahoo toolbar". But then, came Chrome, which was bundled among other in: - Adobe Flash Player updates - Java Runtime Environment (via Oracle) - CCleaner - Avast and AVG installers - Many download portals (e.g., Softonic, CNET Download.com, SourceForge) So, the objective of Chrome, instead of replacing the search engine with a toolbar, it was to do it by installing a new app, but this is exactly the same goal. At the end, the goal of Google was not the save the web, it was to replace the search engine and display ads on these pages (+ make sure that the targeting + rendering is under their control).
  - ceejayoz 1y ago
    The toolbars were bad, too.
wussboy 1y ago
I feel like negative opinions are facts.
StableAlkyne 1y ago
If an ecosystem can't be maintained without bundling malware (adware is by definition malware), then maybe that ecosystem shouldn't exist.

raincole 1y ago

Go to the [Amaya Website](www.amaya.com) is perfectly fine. I seriously have a hard time understanding what this w3.org article is trying to say. A website is a website. To download is to download. The mechanics won't be 'abstracted away' just because you don't call them with the proper terms.

joelfried 1y ago
In 2001 websites weren't what they are today. It was 5 years before jQuery's initial release . . . people needed to learn the proper terms somewhere in those days.
- bornfreddy 1y ago
  I can assure that there were good and bad pages then, the same as there are good and awful pages today.
  - bandrami 1y ago
    There are good pages today?
jchw 1y ago
I don't think it's suggesting "Amaya website" is an incorrect or bad phrase in and of itself, I think it's just using the different passages to show how they'd prefer you style links in hypertext. These days I don't think you'd find many people following this style guide, but I think I understand what they're going for. They seem to be making the prose neutral to the technical details; after all, if you're keyboard navigating, maybe you're not "clicking" per-se. Maybe the pages are printed onto paper, etc.
- raincole 1y ago
  I do agree "Click Here" is bad because you need to read the context to know what "Here" is, and for the accessibility reason my GP mentioned.

jchw 1y ago

I don't think this recommendation is suggesting it would be any better to do that; having a bunch of different links be just Amaya would be wrong too. If you had this situation you'd probably want to carefully choose different selections, e.g. "get [Amaya]", "Amaya [documentation]", etc. If you need to disambiguate or further clarify links, well, you should also set the title attributes too. That ought to help.

oneeyedpigeon 1y ago

> And if every link is just "Amaya" without verbs you can't tell what's what. I'm pretty sure the W3C is not recommending you do that. If you link to the Amaya website, link on the text "Amaya". If you're linking to something else Amaya-related, modify the link text appropriately.