# To web developers: Do you use "click here"?



## Chris Blount (Jun 22, 2001)

I was talking with some fellow web developers and the subject was brought up about using the term "click here" on web pages. The mentioned that they see it everywhere, even on some Google written pages. 

The general consensus was that using the term click here is no longer needed and somewhat unprofessional. Many of the developers here downright hate it.

I actually tend to agree. For me it makes the reader look stupid like they don't know where to click or something. 

I must admit, I'm somewhat guilty at times and in recent years I have changed to simply saying "here" (as you see on our home page). Don't know if its much better but at least it doesn't make the other's in my office mad at me.  

A few years back I used it on one of the local intranet pages. About 30 minutes after it was posted, I had the lynch mob come into my office. It was hysterical.


----------



## SayWhat? (Jun 7, 2009)

I wouldn't call myself a developer, but I've done a few pages. I've used it, or a button saying the same thing. I've also done it with other labelled buttons or text underlining. You have to remember that a lot of people using the web ARE that dumb.


----------



## Stewart Vernon (Jan 7, 2005)

To me it would depend on the situation...

If I write "Click here" and make "here" a link... I think the "Click" calls attention to the link that might go unnoticed in a text sentence like that.

If I had an obvious button, however, I wouldn't say "Click here" on the button.

But I've also seen poor buttons that didn't look like buttons, and you didn't know you could click them unless you hovered over them.

I'm not sure there's a 100% right answer, but there are lots of poorly designed/written/organized Web sites out there.


----------



## Marlin Guy (Apr 8, 2009)

Click Here


----------



## Grentz (Jan 10, 2007)

Depends on the context.

A lot of devs and computer power users overlook the general public that still has a hard time navigating sites and being overwhelmed. "Click Here" is still the most clear and to the point in these situations, and even then can sometimes be overlooked with all the crap going on with sites these days.


----------



## dennisj00 (Sep 27, 2007)

I think you have to take a look at the phishing and spyware ads. . . the 'Click Here' gets a lot of clicks from the inexperienced users if it looks 'official'.

And there's a LOT of inexperienced users - that have been on the web for a while!


----------



## BobaBird (Mar 31, 2002)

I cringe every time I see it. The link text should indicate what you're linking to.


----------



## tcusta00 (Dec 31, 2007)

I'm hardly a web developer but I've done my fair share of sites... and I've never used it. Like others, I think it's just tacky.


----------



## smiddy (Apr 5, 2006)

In my profession it is more important to put the entire link in the text, for the references it points to.


----------



## CJTE (Sep 18, 2007)

If it doesnt say "click here" or "click here", my mother tends not to click it.
Or at least, that's how she was 6 months ago.

Some people really need that designated form of organization.
So, Chris, to you specifically, I would ask myself 'Who is going to see this link?'
If it's people here on DBSTalk, I would imagine that almost everyone knows the standard designation of a link. If you're writing a page for a news paper, I would use "click here" depending on how it fits the contents. You could also say "You can see more information here", etc etc etc.


----------



## dpeters11 (May 30, 2007)

I think most developers hate to use it, but their audience needs it. If someone is on DBSTalk, they generally are a higher end user. 

Heck, maybe you can use server logs. If a large number of users come in using IE6, you may need it. If most use Firefox or other browsers, you don't.


----------



## CJTE (Sep 18, 2007)

dpeters11 said:


> I think most developers hate to use it, but their audience needs it. If someone is on DBSTalk, they generally are a higher end user.
> 
> Heck, maybe you can use server logs. If a large number of users come in using IE6, you may need it. If most use Firefox or other browsers, you don't.


IE6? What about IE8!?


----------



## Stewart Vernon (Jan 7, 2005)

Intended audience should be one of the major factors in determining method of presentation. Not all developers or technical writers "get" that.

Even if you or I think it silly, if the intended user needs the hand-holding, then you kind of have to do it.


----------



## Ron Barry (Dec 10, 2002)

Well I am a web developer... UI lead for a major Real Estate company in my real life with Usability experience and in my opinion, "Click Here" should be avoided and I sure would like to know the use case for having it. If you take a look, what does it really tell the user? It Tells the user to click here.. For what? What are you clicking here for? 

A much better approach is to provide visual clues and information they need to know that they actually should click there. Something that looks like a link.. A pointer changing to a finger. Make it look like a button etc. A good book for people interested in this stuff is "Don't make me Think". The less people have to think about what it is that they are looking at the more they tend to be pleased with the site. 

If you don't think the person will know to click on what you are wanting them to click on and you have to put something like "Click Here" then in my opinion the site or app has done a poor job in designing the experience. 

I do agree with the intended audience comment Stewert has and the site should be done in a why that lends itself to that audience. Too many companies forget that as they create applications that are mirrors of the Databases they serve. Using phrases like "Retrieving records" etc should also be avoided for example. But I still think personally that "Click Here" should be avoided and there is much better ways to accomplish a better experience through visual guides.

One last point... One also needs to keep in mind if the site is designed for a returning users or one offs. With returning users you have a luxury UI operational retention where if done right the next time a user visits the site they will remember how it works and be much more productive. A poorly designed site has what I coined at work as a "Zero Retention UI" which means every time I return nothing clicks in my mind to help me be more productive. Hard to explain, but very easy to spot when visiting a site multiple times.


----------



## armophob (Nov 13, 2006)

It could be viewed as inflection. Where you would use a link as additional information for interested parties on the topic including sources, then no "here", just highlighted text. If you are specifically answering a question with, or describing and referring to, a link or page. Then yes, "here", "this", or "link" could be appropriate. 
This covers experienced users as well as novice.


----------



## phrelin (Jan 18, 2007)

Something about this subject just doesn't click with me.


----------



## Herdfan (Mar 18, 2006)

If you look at the page I maintian for my daughters swim team: http://www.wildwaves.org/

I have one "Click Here" link on the main page for the holiday practice schedule, but that is because I could not really think of a better way to do it.

For the upcoming meets, the name of the meet is a link to the meet packet, the location is a link for directions to the facility and the form to use is a link to that form. People are slowly starting to figure it out.


----------



## 4HiMarks (Jan 21, 2004)

It is absolutely bad form. Links do not even need to be accessed by clicking with a mouse. Using that phrase totally ignores the blind and physically handicapped users, so it isn't even correct to give instructions like " go to and click on the link that says ..... or if JavaScript is turned off for security.


----------



## BobaBird (Mar 31, 2002)

Thinking more about one of the reasons I don't like "click here," I recall a discussion I read (probably How Little Do Users Read?) which says that average users read about 1/4 of the words on a web page. When I go in search of answers, if the site I try doesn't have it, I hope it has a link to one that does. Since links are expected to look like links, that's what the eye then focuses on. If the link text is indicative of the content it is pointing to, I can either click or keep scanning. If the link text is "click here," I have to look at the surrounding text to see why I might want to take that inherently obvious action.


----------



## The Merg (Jun 24, 2007)

Herdfan said:


> If you look at the page I maintian for my daughters swim team: http://www.wildwaves.org/
> 
> I have one "Click Here" link on the main page for the holiday practice schedule, but that is because I could not really think of a better way to do it.
> 
> For the upcoming meets, the name of the meet is a link to the meet packet, the location is a link for directions to the facility and the form to use is a link to that form. People are slowly starting to figure it out.


Why not have the Holiday Practice Schedule text be the link itself?

- Merg


----------



## Herdfan (Mar 18, 2006)

The Merg said:


> Why not have the Holiday Practice Schedule text be the link itself?


I guess because I wanted it to be goofy and multicolored to grab attention, and I think people are accustomed to thinking links should look a certain way.

I may be wrong, but I wanted to make sure people could easily find the schedule and not have to "search for it".


----------



## Ron Barry (Dec 10, 2002)

Nothing wrong with wanting to spice the page up. One way you could have done it is by making it look like a button or give it some transition if you mouse over it. Possible have a calendar icon on each side and then when moused over underline it. 

Just a thought.. Javascript for a link is a bad thing, but then again 90+ percent of users have JS enabled and given people are wanting more and more interactive experiences it is not an unreasonable assumption. However, if you have a large audience then graceful degradation is a viable option for those users that don't want JS on or perhaps are viewing the site via a smart phone. Once again.. really coming down to your intended audience as most of these type of decisions usually do.


----------



## tralfaz (Nov 1, 2009)

I'm not a web developer, but i am a web user. I think "click here" is great.



Herdfan said:


> If you look at the page I maintian for my daughters swim team: http://www.wildwaves.org/
> 
> I have one "Click Here" link on the main page for the holiday practice schedule, but that is because I could not really think of a better way to do it.
> 
> For the upcoming meets, the name of the meet is a link to the meet packet, the location is a link for directions to the facility and the form to use is a link to that form. People are slowly starting to figure it out.


In Herdfan's case, yes there's other ways it could have been done, but for the average user, there's no better way than the way he did it. If that click here wasn't there, I might "assume" it was a heading and the practice schedule was below it somewhere and keep scrolling down. Having the click here spelled out, makes it obvious and if I'm looking for the holiday schedule, I'd go right to it. Having the pointer change or the color change when you hover over something is fine and dandy, but it's not as obvious or user friendly, IMO.
If I'm looking for more information on a page one of the first things I look for is Click Here (or similar). If it's not there, I'll find the link anyway (by ways mentioned in this thread), but not as quickly.


----------



## Herdfan (Mar 18, 2006)

Ron Barry said:


> and given people are wanting more and more interactive experiences it is not an unreasonable assumption. However, if you have a large audience then graceful degradation is a viable option for those users that don't want JS on or perhaps are viewing the site via a smart phone.


No need, or want for that matter, for interactive experiences. This site is for information only. Is it there and can it be found quickly?

If you look at the main Y site, http://www.tri-countyymca.org/ and then go to Aquatics and then the swim team. You have to go back up through the tree every time you want to change the page you are viewing. Too interactive and a complete mess if you ask me. Plus, no real information which is the purpose.


----------



## SayWhat? (Jun 7, 2009)

I just want something to differentiate between links and static text. I don't care if it's a button, small graphic, "Click Here", colored text, underlined text, mouseover or whatever else. With my browsers, I can specify the color and font of text links and visited text links no matter what the webmaster coded and can make it standard for any website I go to. I can make them bright red if I want to.

One site I go to inserts a small arrow inside a small square inline in front of every link on a page.

What I *DO* hate is any form of Flash menu. With tabbed browsers, I hover the cursor over text links then 'Right-Click, Open in New Tab'. Can't do that or most other normal page navigation with Flash based pages or menus. Those sites don't get my business.


----------



## phrelin (Jan 18, 2007)

I must admit I really get irked at flash menu links also.

K-I-S-S is still the best motto for most things in life including web design.


----------



## 4HiMarks (Jan 21, 2004)

A big +1 to the Flash. The part that really irks me is when they create a tiny "window" on their page with "scroll bars" that don't behave like normal scroll bars, and don't respond to the scroll wheel on a mouse. Why do they think almost all mice come with wheels these days? Because scrolling by clicking and dragging is a pain in the butt! 

Web developers need to remember that users spend 99+% of their time on OTHER sites than theirs, so they need to present a UI experience they are familiar and comfortable with. If it looks like a button, it should behave like one, and vice versa.


----------



## SayWhat? (Jun 7, 2009)

Beyond the windows and menus, some site are all Flash based. I have Flash disabled entirely or have it severely crippled, so when I hit a Flash site, nothing happens. I either get the "You need to upgrade" screen or a page I can't navigate at all. I just close the Tab and move on.

I don't understand why companies use sites where the web developer was more interested in showing off their coding abilities than showcasing the information or product the site is supposed to be about.


----------



## 4HiMarks (Jan 21, 2004)

SayWhat? said:


> I don't understand why companies use sites where the web developer was more interested in showing off their coding abilities than showcasing the information or product the site is supposed to be about.


It's mostly because the wrong people at the company are making the decision. The web is still an afterthought to many front-line companies, and they turn the decision-making over to their marketing people, who then turn to an ad agency that only has graphics and print experience which they believe can translate over to web without modification.


----------

