Talk:Blink element

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

[edit] Article name (Blink tag)

This article should more properly be called "Blink element type". —Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.36.194.223 (talk • contribs) 20 September 2005

Technically, I suppose, but it's probably more famous (infamous) as simply the "blink tag." Move and leave redirect?--Mxg75 19:57, 6 October 2005 (UTC)

I've moved it to Blink element for correct terminology and in line with the naming of articles such as Meta element. Blink tag and Blink element type redirect here. --Safalra 19:13, 12 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] No examples?

An entry about the blink tag, yet no examples of it? Kind of funny, eh? --24.249.108.133 00:35, 24 October 2007 (UTC)

There was one, but it was removed with this edit, under the rationale that it wouldn't work in some browsers. -Amake 01:58, 24 October 2007 (UTC)

Specifically, it isn't supported by Internet Explorer, which is still the most common browser. If an example of what blinking text looks like is really required it should be done with an image, but adding blinking content to pages is still a really bad idea. The article contains an example of the source code needed to produce blinking text, and if a reader really needs to see it in action they can paste it into a page to try it out. —Safalra 12:23, 24 October 2007 (UTC)

Just because some browsers don't support images (or certain types of images) doesn't mean we remove images from pages. I realize that category is the minority, but the basic principle still stands. It doesn't detriment the majority of users to have an example, and it can benefit the remainder. I'm not opposed to having an animated image rather than the code, but I don't think that IE not supporting it is a reason to exclude anything. Also, I think it's unreasonable to expect a user to paste the code into a page, especially because the standard code doesn't work in Wikipedia anyway. If a small bit of flashing text is so obtrusive people don't want it on the page, we could add a hide/show button to it. Vicarious (talk) 23:54, 16 November 2007 (UTC)

Browser support is taken into account in Wikipedia — it's why all images uploaded as SVG are converted to PNG for display in articles; for example, all of the images in the SVG article are actually all PNG files generated from the original uploaded SVG. I think perhaps this blinking text issue should be brought up on the talk page for Wikipedia:Accessibility. —Safalra (talk) 13:55, 17 November 2007 (UTC)

Perhaps link to an example somewhere in this article, so it is not forced upon users? An image can be linked by putting colon after the left two brackets - like [[:Image:Onslow.jpg]] produces Image:Onslow.jpg. The description can be made better using a piped link. Graham87 04:13, 18 November 2007 (UTC)

Ah, the joys of collaboration. A much better idea than mine, Graham, thanks! l'aqúatique ^talktome 05:51, 18 November 2007 (UTC)

Yes- I was just thinking we need an example here. If some can't see it blink, it won't matter in fact it will illustrate the article's statement that it doesn't do it in Internet Explorer. A lot more people use firefox now than in the past. As to intruding itself on the reader, it's not porn or anything lol, I will make an understated one, and try and make it as unannoying as possible.Merkinsmum 18:00, 28 November 2007 (UTC)

Sigh I would have made one but I don't think I'm allowed- is it really banned for one word, I wanted to use [1] and no, one word can't cause seizures lol:) I'm going to place a link somewhere here.Merkinsmum 18:38, 28 November 2007 (UTC)

I thought we had agreed to only link it? User:Mstuomel has added an example straight to the page. Did I miss something or did he just not read our ongoing conversation? l'aqùatique ^talk 21:46, 11 December 2007 (UTC)