Don’t use “click here” as link text (2001)

Original Article ↗ Hacker News Discussion ↗

Role of W3C and nature of the guideline

  • Some see this as mere style advice W3C shouldn’t spend effort on, preferring “real” standards work.
  • Others point out the page explicitly says it is non‑normative “bits of wisdom,” not a spec.
  • A few note similar gov/UK guidance exists, but with slightly different wording patterns.

Clarity, style, and calls to action

  • Many commenters actually prefer “click here,” especially for downloads or key actions, finding it clearer and more direct than “Get Amaya”‑style links.
  • Several argue that “Get Amaya” or bare “Amaya” feels like a neutral Wikipedia/news-style link, not a strong call to action.
  • Some propose compromises like “Download Amaya,” “Learn more about Amaya,” or full-phrase links (“Download Amaya now”), favoring more descriptive CTAs over “here.”

Accessibility and screen readers

  • Strong counterargument: screen readers often present a list of links out of context; pages full of “click here” become unusable.
  • Similar concern about multiple identical generic labels like “Learn more” or “Buy” on product lists.
  • Others argue screen readers (or LLM-based assistive tools) should infer context from surrounding text instead of forcing authors to change writing.
  • There is debate over whether to rely on heuristics vs. explicit ARIA/HTML attributes; some highlight inconsistent support across browsers/screen readers.
  • Legal requirements (WCAG/ADA/EU directives) are mentioned as pressure to design for existing assistive tech, even if that tech is seen as brittle.

Buttons vs links and link semantics

  • One camp: links are for navigation/information retrieval and should describe their target; actions (download, submit) should be buttons.
  • Others reject strict “no verbs” rules and consider verb phrases (“Download X”) perfectly valid link text in practice.
  • Inline prose examples (e.g., PiPedal text) show how removing “click here” can make sentences awkward; various rewrites are proposed.

Historical context and evolution

  • Older web: “click here” was everywhere and even arguably helpful when users were new to hypertext.
  • Modern trend: underlines/borders removed, making it harder to see what’s clickable, which some say makes explicit cues like “click here” more attractive again.

SEO, tooling, and implementation details

  • Non-generic link text also helps crawlers and Lighthouse/a11y audits, but some developers routinely ignore “generic link text” warnings.
  • Bookmarking behavior (link text vs page title) is briefly discussed as a minor argument against “click here.”
  • Suggestions include visually hidden text/ARIA to keep short CTAs visually while exposing rich labels to assistive tech.

Skepticism and perceived triviality

  • Some think this is overblown “dogma” or marketing-driven nitpicking with little real-world impact.
  • Others argue that, despite seeming trivial, link wording significantly affects accessibility and should be treated as part of responsible web design.