> But I don't think that the underlining convention is necessary, and I
> think it tends to make pages ugly, ugly, ugly.

I think that this is something that should be left to the individual surfer.  If 
you don't like underlining, turn it off in your browser settings.  Personally I 
perfer to keep the underlining.  It makes it immediately obvious where the 
links are (good for lazy people like me :o)  ) and I suppose that I feel 
more 'comfortable' with it on in some way.  

But the major point that I'm making is one that's been made on this list 
before -- don't take control away from the user if you can avoid it.  We 
(quite rightly) advise people against disabling Back buttons and other 
such things, so why is this any different.  If you leave the default setting 
alone then individual users can choose whether or not to have 
underlining.  It doesn't work the other way (unless you use Netscape 4.x 
which lets you turn off CSS -- this feature seems to have been removed 
from Mozilla based browsers, which I think is a real shame).

Just my tuppence,
Raj.
-- 
__        __
|   |	|   |   Raj Bhaskar, University of Glasgow
|_ / 	|_ /    E-Mail: raj(at)lordofthemoon.com
|   \	|   \   Home Page: http://lordofthemoon.com
|    \	|__/   
One of the universal rules of happiness is:
Always be wary of any helpful item that weighs less than its operating manual
 -- (Terry Pratchett, Jingo)

HTML: hwg-basics mailing list archives, maintained by Webmasters @ IWA