Just noticed…

it's about time.

I wasn't really complaining, the only reason I commented at all was after Nathan's, since it seemed that it contradicted what I thought he thought/said before, so I just wanted to nag him about it.

Feel free to do it if you want, I'm not going to try and talk you out of it.

So instead of complaining what's your brilliant suggestion? You just said "click here" are descriptive and there is no way I'm going to put link 1 link 2 and so on.

Why try to be so "compliant" when there are other things you could worry about, like making fun of how Nathan still isn't on wordpress.

And, it is a good idea because it DOESN'T matter, whether you see one link or multiple links.

Yes, I get the point of what it's about, although I don't really think it's that great of an idea since there's nothing to indicate that there are multiple links unless the user goes and mouses over all the different letters.

As for being accessible to the blind, the rest of your blog (at least the primary parts - the posts and the comments) are accessible (from the WP default at least) as long as you haven't done anything to break it. (Ironically, Nathan's comment system is not, but I've already done enough Nathan prodding in this post).

But, since we're already on the subject, I remember you saying that about the AOL design before, but I do also remember you commenting specifically on the non-descriptive link text and it's negative (or at least ineffective) effects on search engines, both of which apply here. Links on individual letters are not "descriptive", unless you take them in context with what's around them, in which case "click here" would also be considered "descriptive". :)

and a million times over, i don't care about link text breaking google, i care about link text that makes no damn sense and is aol sentric. i had to add "click here" to so much shit when i was producing content for aol and it's driven me bonkers.

i like it conceptually, to make the point like dan was saying. i just wish there was a way to do it and have it "work" in a screen reader. it's a very visual/mouseover responcive technique.

How could 10 "click here"'s be better? The point is not to give you a link to each site, that's stupid, the point is to show there are a lot and each one doesn't matter.

As for the blind; it's sad not to care that much, since the rest of my blog wouldn't work anyways (most likely), so why should I concearn myself with multi-linked words rather then the most obvious of others.

You like it? Is this coming from the same Nathan who criticizes non-descriptive link text for breaking Google??? Even "click here" is better than "f" or "o" or "r"...

I agree on the blind thing by the way.

nice! i really like the whole linking-of-different-parts-of-a-description-to-different sites thing, but it's ever so not nice to blind people. i've never found a decent work around.

my first congrats didn't show up when I wrote about the links

1109. Couple hundred more links should do it.

congrats DanO!

you are at 1019 as of right now

Congrats! That is very cool!