I like the concept, but it has to be done nicely. Also, it may just be for savvy users, as the inexperienced may not know what a certain icon or link style means. If your target audience is less experienced I think it may just confuse users. For example, I've had users get confused because visited links were a different colors than links they haven't visited yet.

Having said that, I do think with touch devices becoming more popular, we won't be able to rely on people being able to hover to see where a link goes, so differentiating between internal/external links will probably be getting more attention in the near future.

I agree the concept is good, but the UX magazine is a poor example. I spent about 30 seconds looking for the internal links, thinking they all look the same. I eventually saw the internal links. the grey they use as a background on the link is far too light for my screen.

I liked the way this tutorial suggests:

http://www.askthecssguy.com/2006/12/showing_hyperlink_cues_with_cs_1.html

Most people who care will be able to work out what each of the icons mean.

I agree, I prefer the seperation of links from external and internal. Having just looked at UX Magazine, oh the irony, the internal links are badly designed on this site. The light grey bg colour is just aweful.

I do think that sometimes the links get a little crazy. But I have seen these internal links not only stear readers to areas they are interested in. Can be a great tool for home pages to let a reader skim to find a link to what they are looking for. Plus what about the seo values of the links. Which I believe is why you may see it so much

I do agree it's a little crazy, but at least it works. I don't know if it confuses the users, though. Anyway, outbound links are bad if you don't get linked from many websites.

Some practices are definitely bad, however what you are showing here is definitely a nice solution to turn something bad into something useful.

Thanks for sharing... I'm sending this article to the person in charge of our blog.

Interesting post. Seems like there should be a greasemonkey plugin somewhere that would help you to differentiate between the two.

It's interesting that you mention this kind of behavior though, it's not something I'd previously considered. I guess thats the point in testing sites, so you can find all the different ways in which people operate and interact with your sites.

I think its a useful concept that kind of keeps the user on track with the content they are using. This is a pretty interesting topic for me at the minute because im currently working with these guys in Bournemouth(UK) who are building websites, and they need to take these things into account. They do some pretty good stuff: http://www.pixelfish.co.uk/.

It drives me mad! Especially when they have those little ads when you hover over the link. You wouldn't get that from us! Keep up the good blogging... Regards, Danny.

I really wonder if a viewer really cares. When a reader is scanning a site they are looking for relevent information in the website content. If the link gets them there it works. If that information is in your site then good for you. Unless you are willing to do the work and help a reader to the next page.

I must admit I've been guilty of favoring my own sites for linking, but I never thought of styling the links differently. Perhaps I'll keep the underline, but add a tiny arrow...

Muito bom este conteúdo, parabens também trago dicas de design, da uma olhada la www.vitordesigner.com.br

This is an interesting observation. I think that you really have to control the amount of outbound links you have though, otherwise you're losing "link juice". You don't want to have an incredibly huge amount of outbound links, which is why most sites partake in this practice you dislike. Blame google, not the copywriters.

Check out my article on affordable web design and development services to see more information about what is truly needed to be successful with your online presence.

thanks for the great blog.