Ah... Am I the only one for whom this is slightly less-than-intuitive? Should we maybe at least include a short hint on top or at the end of the page (essentially your reply)? Maybe I'm too much a book person, but when I see a star somewhere, I jump down to the end of the page / the site, I don't assume that I should point my mouse at the star... M. On Fri, Nov 28, 2008 at 11:21 AM, K. Peachey <p858snake(a)yahoo.com.au> wrote: -- Michael Bimmler mbimmler(a)gmail.com

On Fri, Nov 28, 2008 at 11:33 AM, K. Peachey <p858snake(a)yahoo.com.au> wrote: Cheers! M. -- Michael Bimmler mbimmler(a)gmail.com

On 11/28/08, Thomas Dalton <thomas.dalton(a)gmail.com> wrote: So the mystery has been solved, and good grief! In terms of accessibility this is about as useful as road-signs printed in braille. I should not have to (literally) feel around in the (figurative) dark. Please fix this or it will only be a matter of time before some nimrod decides it would be neat to use the same format in article space for inline reference citations. (This would follow closely in the footsteps of other efforts to decrease the visibility of refs, like putting them in a tiny scrollable box or one collapsed by default, hiding them in invisible html comments, or at the very bottom of the page beyond the navboxes and external link-spam, or even on a separate page—I'm not exaggerating any of this.) —C.W.

2008/11/29 K. Peachey <p858snake(a)yahoo.com.au>au>: It's not ideal, but it's certainly better. When I see an inexplicable symbol on a webpage, my first thought is to hover the mouse over it and hope for some kind of explanation.