![inherit font looks awful on chrome inherit font looks awful on chrome](https://www.fontfreak.com/fontimages/v/VTC-Bad-Tattoo-Hand-One_big.gif)
Links are usually styled in this pattern with something like this (this comes from The Gates Notes - Wired is similar) It's that the underlining is REALLY prominent and obvious on both mobile and desktop. This is not simply that links are blue (in not all cases is this true). Here's a JS Fiddle based on the Gates version I am seeing the pattern I'm talking about all over.
![inherit font looks awful on chrome inherit font looks awful on chrome](https://i.stack.imgur.com/p8X47.png)
I made that post at 1am after a long day of. It makes me wonder - are we seeing a rollback where for a long time a graphic designer ruled the design with no input from a usability expert or UX/UI designer to where people are calling "Enough!" on non-functional design?īody links are (I believe) what is under discussionĬorrect. Big thick underlines and changing the background (not the font color) on hover. Lately, I've seen some sites that make links really obvious. I actually run some sites that I did not design where I basically cannot see the links (I have a minor color impairment, but I've asked others and the links are just very hard to see impossible with some monitor settings). But it was clear.Īnd for many years now, the vogue has been to make links practically impossible to find. You could argue, as some human factors experts did, that this was a poor choice - blue is not the best color, underlines conflict sometimes with filenames_using_underscores and so on.
#Inherit font looks awful on chrome how to#
In the early days of the web, we all knew how to find links on a page - blue text with an underline was a link.