The fact that Cancel uses a GET request and not a POST request is not a valid argument for how to design the user interface. One of the problems with the cancel link is that it says cancel. That is definitely an non-navigation action and I prefer buttons for that type of action. If the link said "go somewhere else with the side-effect that your content won't be deleted", then it would be clear to me that it was a navigation link. One way or another, we expect the user to click one of the two elements to end the transaction that they started with Delete. The two options should be equal. People accidentally click Delete sometimes and the reason we offer a cancel is so that they can have recourse of not deleting (and feel confident about it too, since they could simply hit Home and achieve the same). We shouldn't try to guess that the user probably wants to click Delete and therefore it should stick out more. I don't have any experience browsing web sites as if I were visually impaired; how do people use buttons in those cases? Surely a normal HTML button can't be a useability obstacle for that user group? In the end, it is the consistency that is the most important to me. Make them both the same kind of interface and I'll learn to live with it. Finding more opportunities to mix up links and buttons is a bad idea. Robert