Benct Philip Jonsson wrote:
> On 10.4.2007 Jim Henry wrote:
>> These docs probably want a little more formatting cleanup.
>> Let me know if you spot any broken links or other problems.
>> (For instance, maybe it would be cleaner if the links weren't
>> all underlined?  Does anyone know offhand how to do that
>> with a CSS command?) 
> 
> IMNSHO links should be underlined in HTML (and everything
> else shouldn't: there is italics or boldface for what
> underlining does in handwriting.) Those sites that use
> boldface and/or a different color without underlining for
> links are very irritating.  I don't even grok they are links
> until I happen to point the mouse on them.

I agree entirely.[*] But it’s good to know it’s easy to override in
every web browser, I think, just by poking around in the preferences
dialog. Then, if you run a gecko-based browser, put something like

u { text-decoration: none; font-style: italic; }
u:after, u:before { content: "_"; }

into your $profile/chrome/userContent.css file and the <u> tag will stop
underlining and start making text italic with _underscores_ around it,
getting very close to text is underlined iff it’s a link. It’s *your*
webbrowser, not some überl33t webdesigner who doesn’t live your life’s.
Don’t let *them* tell you how to view a website.

[*]: I find Wikipedia, when I’m not logged in and running on a browser
other than my normal ones, particularly irritating, because you often
get [[annoying]] [[links]] [[like]] [[this]], and with no underlining
it’s impossible to tell that each word is a separate link, rather than
just one long one.