6 ms·

Almost everybody I know (that isn't in IT) double-clicks on links. Even my ex-boss (who was a programmer back in the day) double-clicks on links. And no matter

Almost everybody I know (that isn't in IT) double-clicks on links. Even my ex-boss (who was a programmer back in the day) double-clicks on links. And no matter how many times you try to explain the concept of "single-click" to them, they don't seem to get it.

scott_s 17y ago
Or don't care and don't want to build in a special case.
- derefr 17y ago
  Perhaps we should get the browser makers to make double-clicking links do something else, then; as it is, no amount of IT whinging will teach people to stop doing something that works anyway, just because it's technically non-optimal.
  - scott_s 17y ago
    Does it bother you that it's not optimal? It doesn't bother the people who do it. I think breaking things on purpose just to stop a behavior that's not harmful is unwise.
    - derefr 17y ago
      Doesn't bother me, but it does seem to bother the people who come up with these lists. (I am slightly bothered, though, by people who click on a a link, and then click it again when it's "loading too slowly," thinking that they're hurrying it along instead of going back to the start of a new request.) The best solution in both cases would be for the browser to simply ignore any attempts to load a GET of URL X in a given frame/window/tab when it's already attempting to load the same GET of URL X in that frame/window/tab.
      - IChrisI 17y ago
        I click links again if it's been more than a few seconds. I know full well it starts a new request, but often that works faster than letting the old request time out and be re-sent.
    - apotheon 17y ago
      > a behavior that's not harmful . . . until someone double-orders something that costs $600.
      - wlievens 17y ago
        Granted, but that would be a pretty awfully designed website, no?
  - derobert 17y ago
    If this is a real problem, perhaps browser makers should just ignore the second click?
    - derefr 17y ago
      That would be a wise "something else." :)
  - apotheon 17y ago
    Unfortunately, double-clicking a link when submitting a form (for instance) can double-submit it, which can be especially problematic when confirming an order and ending up getting charged twice.
ZeroGravitas 17y ago
You were supposed to double-click to follow hypertext links. This meant you could single-click them to select them and perform other actions. Apparently Mosaic messed up this system and everyone else followed. At least I think I recall reading that somewhere. Googling for web, double-click, link etc. gives you nothing of any use.

scott_s 17y ago

Or don't care and don't want to build in a special case.

derefr 17y ago
Perhaps we should get the browser makers to make double-clicking links do something else, then; as it is, no amount of IT whinging will teach people to stop doing something that works anyway, just because it's technically non-optimal.
- scott_s 17y ago
  Does it bother you that it's not optimal? It doesn't bother the people who do it. I think breaking things on purpose just to stop a behavior that's not harmful is unwise.
  - derefr 17y ago
    Doesn't bother me, but it does seem to bother the people who come up with these lists. (I am slightly bothered, though, by people who click on a a link, and then click it again when it's "loading too slowly," thinking that they're hurrying it along instead of going back to the start of a new request.) The best solution in both cases would be for the browser to simply ignore any attempts to load a GET of URL X in a given frame/window/tab when it's already attempting to load the same GET of URL X in that frame/window/tab.
    - IChrisI 17y ago
      I click links again if it's been more than a few seconds. I know full well it starts a new request, but often that works faster than letting the old request time out and be re-sent.
  - apotheon 17y ago
    > a behavior that's not harmful . . . until someone double-orders something that costs $600.
    - wlievens 17y ago
      Granted, but that would be a pretty awfully designed website, no?
- derobert 17y ago
  If this is a real problem, perhaps browser makers should just ignore the second click?
  - derefr 17y ago
    That would be a wise "something else." :)
- apotheon 17y ago
  Unfortunately, double-clicking a link when submitting a form (for instance) can double-submit it, which can be especially problematic when confirming an order and ending up getting charged twice.

ZeroGravitas 17y ago

You were supposed to double-click to follow hypertext links. This meant you could single-click them to select them and perform other actions. Apparently Mosaic messed up this system and everyone else followed. At least I think I recall reading that somewhere. Googling for web, double-click, link etc. gives you nothing of any use.