

Readability Updated: An End To The Yank Of The Hyperlink - nirmal
http://blog.arc90.com/2010/06/03/readability-updated-an-end-to-the-yank-of-the-hyperlink/?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+Arc90Blog+%28arc90+blog%29

======
joeyh
I never directly follow hyperlinks a page that I'm still reading. Instead I
middle-click to open them in a new tab, and continue reading in my current tab
until I'm done (or until I get stuck and need the info from a linked page to
continue). Only then will I look at the new tabs. This works pretty well for
maintaining concentration, but it's only accessible to users who understand
tabbed browsing and go out of their way to develop the habit.

I wonder if a better interface than footnotification would be to make the
hyperlinks not immediately open the new page, but instead add the linked page
to a list displayed at the bottom or side of the document. This way, you could
click on any links that seem interesting and get a list of them to follow
later.

~~~
greyman
I also browse this way, but this is not the issue he is trying to solve. The
issue is, that the mere fact that the hyperlink is present in the text will
slightly impair your concentration, because a part of your mind will need to
evaluate whether to click or not [there was a study proving this].

And I tend to agree, I found the text (especially a long one) without
hyperlinks be easier to concentrate on. Really, it's better and I welcome this
option to be added.

------
gr366
I think this is a fine option to provide, but I don't buy the argument that
inserting a superscripted number is any less cognitively disruptive than
underlining the text of a link. It's still distracting from the flow of
reading.

~~~
sophacles
You've never been reading, reached the end of a page, and sai to yourself, "Oh
hey footnotes, I wonder what they are attached to?"? Superscripts are easier
to ignore because they don't modify the word or phrase's presentation, while
links necessarily modify the whole thing.

~~~
philwelch
Personally, whenever I find a superscript I compulsively go to the footnote
and back. I think of footnotes as asides which would be too long to put in
parentheses. (I do ignore footnotes that just go to citations.)

------
jpwagner
There's seems to be some disagreement and debate here about what is "less
distracting" between superscripts (followed by footnotes) and links. To me
this seems obvious since one adds text to the sentence (literally a number)
and the other has only an underline to signify its presence. However, it just
occurred to me that this is not what this debate is about.

The distraction in this context is not defined by the presence or absence of
text, it's the perceived value of the content there. I think historically
footnotes have been of lower value to the reader than links. Take wikipedia as
an example: for info that is absolutely necessary to understand the article
there is a link, and for further reading or references there is a footnote.
Maybe we have been conditioned to think links are necessary reading because of
their historical use, and that's why one camp sees them as "more distracting."

~~~
nhebb
_I think historically footnotes have been of lower value to the reader than
links_

I must have OCFD (obsessive-compulsive footnote disorder). I feel compelled to
read every footnote.

Years ago I read the first ~100 pages of The Sound and the Fury, then stopped.
It still bugs me that I never finished it. Unread footnotes are like that.

------
jpwagner
footnotes are an antiquated paradigm and links exist specifically to make
finding more info easier.

although hover over text is the worst.

~~~
mbreese
I think the point they are trying to make is that sometimes less information
is better. For example, if I am reading an article about dog walking
(example), I don't necessarily want my mind to be distracted by the wikipedia
link to Wheaten terriers. This type of information, when presented as
Readability does, is better handled as a footnote.

There are many sites online that I prefer to read using Readability (Gruber
comes to mind), but there are more that I prefer to read in the normal
hyperlink format we all know and love. For the ones where I use Readability, I
think the _option_ to use footnotes is nice.

~~~
jpwagner
thanks, i read the article.

footnotes are convenient when reading a physical object because, as you imply,
more information right there can be distracting. however if you choose to go
find the footnote, that's up to the reader and would objectively qualify as a
distraction. similarly, a link with no hover over text is left for the reader
to choose to click or not. this _IS_ a footnote in a sense and is the modern
paradigm used for digital reading.

~~~
Retric
I think, having a link in the middle of a sentence is more distracting than
using a footnote style link at the end of the sentence. EX:

The war of 1812 was started by the United States in response to a series of
_trade restrictions_ (do you want to know more?) to impede on-going American
trade with France. Vs.

The war of 1812 was started by the United States in response to a series of
trade restrictions to impede on-going American trade with France. (do you want
to know more?)

~~~
jpwagner
no, more like:

The war of 1812 was started by the United States in response to a series of
_trade restrictions_ to impede on-going American trade with France.

Vs.

The war of 1812 was started by the United States in response to a series of
trade restrictions to impede on-going American trade with France.4

    
    
      4--trade restrictions <www.somelamewebsite.com>

~~~
Retric
I often find when I am reading Wikipedia or tvtropes.org just processing all
the great links takes significant effort. AKA why do I have 15 tabs open.

So my text _(would you like to know more)_ is trying to represent that choice.
And my point is the presence of a link or a footnote both represent the option
to learn more and when creating content deciding where to place those links is
important.

PS: Wikipedia uses both and I find the footnotes are far less distracting.

------
phreeza
I liked Readability, but since I got a Kindle I am in love with Instapaper.
Does more or less the same thing, but pushes it to your ebook reader. I hope
they add a similar feature.

------
derekj
This is a great improvement. Should definitely help with sites like TechCrunch
where they litter their articles with about 5,000 links to previous articles
they've written.

~~~
nuclear_eclipse
except now their articles are littered with about 5000 superscripted
footnotes, which IMO are more visually jarring than a different color of text.

~~~
derekj
True enough but for some reason a superscript is less distracting to me than a
blue link. It's almost a compulsion for me to hover over each inline link to
see where it goes. Hopefully this cuts down on that.

~~~
nuclear_eclipse
And it's a compulsion for me to follow every footnote to the bottom of the
page to see what I'm missing... I guess that's what options are for. :)

~~~
derekj
You don't have to go down to the bottom of the page - you can still hover over
the link and still click it, even though it's not blue and underlined.

~~~
nuclear_eclipse
I just mean footnotes in general. If I see [x] after a phrase, I instinctively
feel the need to look up the footnote and find out what the author wanted to
say or reference there. Adding footnote links that aren't actually footnotes
would drive me crazy.

------
docgnome
I wonder if this will really help with the issue of comprehension that Nick
Carr was talking about. The links are still there and still visible so I'm not
sure that I won't just use them in the same way. That said, it is nicer
looking now that they don't pop nearly as much.

~~~
CitizenKane
I think that it is something that helps. In my experience, footnotes promote
further reading because there is more of a tendency to read through an article
and then look at the footnotes. I think this is corroborated by ad placement
strategies (or more like this links). Users tend to read through, then look at
what's at the bottom of the content at which point they'll take action on it.

~~~
docgnome
Hrm. I guess I'm just strange then. I always read footnotes as soon as I run
into them.

------
JadeNB
I know that it's not the point of the article, but I find it deeply depressing
that a post about something called _Readability_ contains the following
sentences:

> While Readability does remove ads, that was never _its_ intended purpose.
> _It’s_ goal from the outset was clear ….

(emphases mine).

~~~
jpwagner
if you care, email Rich, the author, and ask that he remove the apostrophe. no
one here needs to be made aware of your nitpicking.

~~~
JadeNB
OK, fair enough—the downvotes have spoken clearly.

Truth to tell, I looked at the article for contact information—obviously far
too cursorily—and, when I didn't see it, figured that the author would be
likely to spot it on Hacker News. (I have since e-mailed the author.)

~~~
umbrae
I've fixed the error.

(You were right in either case, apparently.)

