120. WCAG 2

Posted in Classic shows on June 4, 2008 by Paul Boag

In this weeks show we talk with Patrick Lauke about WCAG 2 and we discuss the perils of blindly following conventions.

News and events

IE testing made easy

Testing in Internet Explorer is horrible for many reasons. Not least the fact that you cannot run multiple versions of IE on a single operating system.

In the past there have been a number of solutions to this problem. There were standalone versions of IE. However, it quickly became apparent that they did not behave as IE does natively. There are online services which provided screenshots of your site in different versions of IE. However that does not give a sense of whether interactive elements were working correctly.

The only really feasible solution was to run multiple operating systems as virtual PCs but this was slow and inconvenient.

However, it looks like things might be about to change. DebugBar have just released IETester. A free web browser that allows you to have the rendering and javascript engines of IE8 beta 1, IE7, IE 6 and IE5.5 on Vista and XP all at once.

They are currently describing it as Alpha software (whatever that means), so it sounds like it is still a work in progress. As with any such software it is hard to know if it is accurate. If you do choose to use IETester, I would still recommend giving your site a final once over in native copies of IE before making it live.

That said, this does look very promising and I will be trying it out myself very soon.

Hosting your Javascript libraries

Our next story is an announcement from Google. They have started to host the main Javascript libraries including…

jQuery
prototype
script.aculo.us
MooTools
dojo

This means that if you are using a Javascript library it does not need to run from your own server, but can pull it directly from Google.

“Why would I want to do that?” I hear you cry. Mainly to improve performance. First, according to people much cleverer than myself the Google servers are faster and can deliver libraries much quicker. I know little about server performance so I will have to take their word on this.

However the main reason is that if enough web developers use this approach we will see a significant caching benefit. Lets say a user visits headscape.co.uk and this site pulls its jquery library from Google. Boagworld.com does the same thing so when the user visits that site it uses the cached version (from the visit to Headscape) rather than re-downloading it again. As more and more sites pull their Javascript libraries from Google the likelihood that a user already has a cached copy of that particular library increases.

Of course allowing Google to host your Javascript does require a level of trust. What if Google goes down? What if Google turns evil and starts using Javascript to manipulate your site? What about the data this approach gives Google about your site?

However, if these concerns do not worry you, then there are definitely tangible benefits.

Prototyping website interaction in flash

Next up we have a tutorial demonstrating a quick and easy way to prototype complex website interactions.

In some ways the static Photoshop comp is becoming less useful. Modern websites have numerous interactive elements that are hard to convey through static images. There is a need for something that can demonstrate this functionality.

We have spoken before about wireframing interactive websites, but not how to demonstrate changes in visual look and feel. This article on boxes and arrows suggests that Flash maybe the answer.

The advantage that flash has over something like a clickable PDF is that it allows for easier updating when the client wants to make changes. However, it does require basic Actionscript skills. Fortunately, the tutorial talks you through these step by step and none of it is too challenging.

If you are looking for a way to better demonstrate interaction in your design comps then this might be the answer.

The rule of thirds

The final news story today is another post from those lovely people at Smashing Magazine (we love them since they said nice things about our podcast!) The article entitled “Applying Diving Proportion To Your Web Design“, introduces the reader to the fascinating subject of the golden ratio (also known as the divine proportion or rule of thirds.)

If you haven’t come across this principle before then I highly recommend reading more. The rule of thirds emerged in the Renaissance but has always excited in nature. There seems to be something inherently pleasing about these proportions and they occur again and again. There is something about human perception that is naturally drawn to this composition. We can use this to our advantage when designing websites.

The article goes on to demonstrate how the golden ratio can be used in all aspects of design from photography to web design. In particular it focuses on the benefits this can provide to the grid structure of your sites.

Admittedly if you have not come across the rule of thirds before this can all sound like hocus pocus. However it really does work. Following principles like this can dramatically improve your designs. What is more they can be followed by anyone even if you would not consider yourself a designer.

Feature: Defying Conventions

As the web matures an increasing number of conventions are emerging. But should we always follow the crowd? In this weeks feature we discuss just that.

Interview: Patrick Lauke on WCAG2

Paul: So joining me today is Patrick Lauke from splintered.co.uk, is that best way to refer to you?

Patrick: Yeah, it’s one of my many monikers, yes.

Paul: Just so many presence on the web, you’re just so well known. Good to have you on the show, Patrick, it’s been a while.

Patrick: Thanks for having me.

Paul: I don’t think you’ve actually been on Boagworld before have you done Dot Net with me, but I don’t think you’ve done Boagworld.

Patrick: Exactly, yeah, I’ve only had the pleasure of sitting on the Dot Net one.

Paul: Well this is the proper grown up, you know, professional version compared to Dot Net.

Patrick: Super!

Paul: So the reason I wanted you on the show, Patrick, I have to be honest is as much for me as it is for my listeners this time round, because you are our resident accessibility expert, and we had a conversation a long time ago on the show about WCAG2 and we talked a little bit, not with yourself but we’ve talked on the show before about WCAG2 and it was coming along and all the rest of it, but it suddenly occurred to me we haven’t done anything on it for ages, and I’m wholly ignorant on the subject and the current state of affairs, so I thought, I know, I’ll get Patrick on the show, I’m sure he’s bothered to read it and knows what’s going on. Hence you’re here.

Patrick: Excellent.

Paul: So you’re not going to let me down, you have actually read WCAG2 have you?

Patrick: I have, I’ve been fairly involved with it, yeah.

Paul: Good! That’s encouraging. OK so perhaps the best place to start is, where’s it currently at, what’s the stage of development at the moment?

Patrick: Right, well literally a few weeks ago it entered what’s called the Candidate Recommendation Stage, all part of that W3C terminology they use. It wasn’t…it has been in last call for about 2 years now, but yes, Candidate Recommendation really means that now the WCAG working group and the general public has been kind of sending in comments etc on the status of the document. They’ve all reached kind of a broad consensus about, yeah, it’s fairly…it’s pretty much there, you know, it’s fairly accurate, technically there’s no big howlers in the actual wording of the things. I mean there might still be a few minor, minor details that change from now until the end, but pretty much the actually core of it is as good as it’s going to get.

Paul: OK.

Patrick: And really the…kind of the purpose of this Candidate Recommendation Stage, you know, why aren’t they going straight out and releasing this now as a standard, is really to give people an opportunity to start test driving, you know, what WCAG2 says in its current state, so working group thinks it’s pretty much there, let’s test it out actually in the real world, so give people the opportunity to run it…run their websites through their paces according to WCAG2, see if, you know, things are feasible, if it’s realistic to kind of say, yeah, this will be the standard from now on, and they’ve actually…they want to make it quite official, so if you have an intention of kind of doing that, you have a website and you want to actually officially say, OK, I’m going to use that website to test WCAG2, they’re now asking for people to basically register their interest and to actually, you need to then implement that, you need to say, right, I’m going to run WCAG2 on my site and by the 30th of June you want to be able to basically say right, I’ve finished it, and then give feedback and basically say yeah, no problem, or you know, we tried and tried, but this is actually not realistic, it might need to be modified, but unless there are major, major issues that come out in the wash as people are now trying to implement it and test drive it, it should be fine really. One of the main things with WCAG2 is, as with any kind of Candidate Recommendation documents, is really that there are a few items where even though we’ve got consensus, the working group isn’t 100% sure that they’re going to make it in their current stage, so they’ve kind of gone very ambitious with some of them, but they realise that yeah, it might not actually make it through, and they’re called….quite fittingly, items at risk, which in the latest CR document, Candidate Recommendation document, they’re clearly marked, and they’re basically…the testing phase is really about, let’s have a look, specifically these kind of items at risk, can they actually be implemented in the kind of more stringent way that we’ve worded them? If not, we might have to scale them back. I mean there’s one for instance where it says, it talks about, you know, colour contrast, and they’ve worded it currently that the contrast needs to be on a ratio of 5:1, so if you’ve say got, you know, text and background colours, you need to have…want to do your calculations for the various algorithms, there needs to be a contrast of 5:1. Now they’ve put that at risk, because some people still felt that it might be a little bit….setting the mark a little bit too high, and they were already saying, OK, well if it turns out that it is too ambitious to say, right, you need to have that ratio, that they’re happy to kind of jump back to 4.5:1 or even 4:1, so it’s kind of things like that, we’re really now at the nitty-gritty stage with these kinds of things, of saying, you know, can it actually be implemented.

Paul: So this is getting very close to the point where, you know, your average website owner and your average web designer needs to be…we need to be looking at this now, don’t we really? I mean we’re getting that close?

Patrick: Yeah

Paul: OK, I mean it sounds like things have gone a long way since the kind of early stages where WCAG2 was quite heavily criticised. I mean what kind of shape do you personally think it’s in at the moment?

Patrick: Yes, I mean looking back, I think it was May 2006 where Joe Clarke wrote his kind of vitriolic post, to Hell with WCAG2 on A List Apart, we have definitely come a long way since then. I think it was a good wake-up call back then for somebody like Joe, somebody of Joe’s stature, to really come along and, where web designers maybe at that stage weren’t really that interested in WCAG2 to actually say, look guys, you need to start looking at this because in the current shape it’s in, it’s really not feasible, and what Joe said at the time, there are many things that he criticised, but you know, overall he was spot-on with a lot of the things. The main thing was that the whole document at that time was extremely bulky, it was one big monolithic document which tried to do everything. There was loads of Orwellian-style language, everything was made up of Newtons, and they pretty much invented…because the problem with WCAG2 it’s a kind of full shadow of it, is that because it tries to be technology agnostic, it tries to avoid in the main document and talk about anything relating to actual technology, so it doesn’t mention specific HTML elements or things like that, so to make it very tech-agnostic, that document at the time really re-defined almost anything, so it didn’t talk about web pages, but it started ta
lking about web units, and basically the glossary was almost bigger than the actual document, so you know, that was very problematic because even people who’d been doing web development for years, if you just gave them the document as it was, they would have had to completely re-learn whatever all the terms were, it was of no practical use.

Paul: So has all that gone now?

Patrick: Yes. The language has been simplified. I mean it’s gone now from 2006 onwards it’s gone through, I think it was 2 or 3 last call stages. Well it went back from…in 2006 it was at last call stage, literally the stage before we’re saying, OK, we’re up to Candidate Recommendation. They actually scaled that back. W3C don’t admit that was because of Joe Clarke, and OK, it was probably not exclusively because of his article, but I think the general kind of feelings that it stirred up, or that it tapped into, kind of made the W3C reconsider. They’ve scaled it back to a public working draft, which is kind of one step previous to that. Everybody had a pretty good look at it. There’s been rounds and rounds of comments, I mean I’ve submitted in the 2 year period that it’s now been since that article, I’ve submitted loads of comments. I mean ranging from really small things like, oh you missed a comma there, or that’s not very clear, to kind of very substantial things about the actual core concepts that are being discussed, and in that process, a lot of really hard copywriting and editing has happened since then. They’ve also split out the document into far more manageable sub-documents themselves. One of the main things, for instance, is that the whole structure of, you know, WCAG2, it’s actually a suite of documents. The main guidelines document itself is only a handful of pages, I think it’s…yes, 19 pages I’ve printed out today. That is purely the core guidelines document, and that’s the only part if you will, that is actually normative, that’s the only one that is the actual guidelines. Then there was a lot of extra documents that really are just what’s called informative, so you can read through them, but you can’t actually refer to them in terms of, you know, just if somebody sort of says, your site isn’t accessible, you can’t point to an informative document and say, yeah, but I’m following that particular thing.

Paul: OK

Patrick: One of the documents will be the techniques document. You can’t actually point to that and say, well I’m following these, because the only thing that’s important are the actual guidelines, so they’ve really slimmed it down, broken it up into separate documents, you know, 19 pages printed out, it’s nothing, you can pick that up, you can read it through. It’s roughly the same size now of WCAG1 if you will. So they’ve simplified the language. There were loads more contentious kind of fundamental problems with WCAG2 as it was back in May 2006. I mean one of the main ones that really caught, you know, the eye of a lot of developers, was the concept of base lines where basically at the time they were saying, even though the concept itself is good, but it’s pretty much read like, as a website owner I can basically say, right, to work with my site, you need to have Flash and you need to have this and you need to have that, which was completely opposite to, you know the very austere WCAG1 which basically said, you can’t have anything. This seemed to open it up completely and allow for website owners to basically say, right, you know, we are going to do a whole Flash website if you will, and our baseline will be, you need to have Flash to use this site. But the concept was good at the time, but the wording pretty much came out like that, so these kinds of things, base lines, at its core, is actually still in the current document. They’ve basically re-worded it and turned it on its head, where before it was talking about website owners can say what technology they’re using, now it’s far more, if as a website owner or designer, I’m using a technology, I need to make sure that I know for a fact that it’s supported by accessibility…assistive technologies, for instance screen readers, so they kind of turned it on their head. The onus isn’t any more on the user to say…to have the latest technology, but on the developer to make sure that the technology they use needs to be accessibility supported. So loads of kind of fundamental changes like that have happened really, and no, definitely to go back to the original question, it has improved quite dramatically since May 2006. I mean I’ve now familiarised myself extensively with it. It’s good bedtime reading material!

Paul: You’re not convincing me of that one. Not unless I want to go to sleep I guess!

Patrick: I know. OK, I’ll be blunt, it’s better toilet reading. You kind of print it out and you put it there, instead of a novel you’ve got that there. But it is very good. I mean it’s now down to the level of…it almost reads like common sense. You kind of…you go through it and you just find yourself nodding and thinking, like, that’s not contentious. OK, there are still a few here and there where I might slightly disagree in a heated argument, but overall there’s nothing really there that makes me think, ooh no, that’s never going to be realised, so absolutely, it’s in very, very good shape I would say, and this Candidate Recommendation Stage looks like it’s going to be very successful really, and fingers crossed, I think; I’m not 100% sure now of the timeline that W3C are working by, but I wouldn’t be surprised if, say by the end of calendar year, we might see actually WCAG2 being released and getting out and becoming a proper recommendation.

Paul: Cool. So then what’s the big differences from WCAG1. I mean with WCAG1, you know, every kind of standards-based designer became very familiar with that. I was a great fan of that, you know, single sheet which listed everything by priorities and I would go through and I’d check myself off, and I kind of knew where I stood with WCAG1. With WCAG2, it’s much more of an unknown entity at the moment, so kind of give me the potted version. Where are the big changes?

Patrick: Right. No you’re quite right, it’s actually a lot more vague WCAG2, but it’s that way for a reason. Right, so WCAG1 really was very much, I mean it’s a product of its time, I mean it was 1999, the web was still quite in its infancy, and it is very much HTML focused, WCAG1, there’s no denying that. There’s a few mentions of things like CSS, but pretty much it’s all about how to use HTML to create content that at the time would be deemed accessible. I mean JavaScript was pretty much bad; I mean you could use it but you need to make sure there’s a fall-back. Non-W3C technologies were completely out basically, unless you provided a W3C alternative, so things like Flash and PDF etc, when they first started becoming more and more used, that directly clashed with WCAG1 at the time. Now WCAG2, as I mentioned before, it’s far more tech-agnostic. It tries to basically not t
alk about specific technologies. It doesn’t directly reference HTML or CSS or Flash or Flex or various other things in the actual core guidelines. Now the reason for that is WCAG1 as soon as it was released, the thought behind it was that it would be updated on a very regular basis, but from 1999 onwards, nothing has really happened, and because it was so heavily influenced by the technology of its day, it aged very, very badly. I mean nowadays, if I hear people saying, we’re building against WCAG1, I almost have to chuckle a bit, because it is pretty much just going back to, you know, we’re doing the web like it’s 1999, you’re not really allowed to do anything, and it’s completely opposite to what’s actually happening with the web. I’m not going…well I am going to say Web 2.0 to sound all trendy, but you know, all those things, Ajax, Flash, PDF etc, particularly say PDF, there is now…there are now easy ways, or relatively easy ways, to create reasonably accessible PDFs, I mean the technology itself has moved on, the format has moved on, screen readers are quite capable of dealing with well-structured PDFs that are created in a certain way. We’re not really talking about, you know, you need to test your pages with links because, you know, people might just use a text only browser. Things have moved on, but WCAG1 is pretty much kind of frozen in time of 1999. There have been a few kind of…people who’ve been working towards WCAG1 have started kind of re-interpreting it a bit for the modern days. I mean in my own practice in my…one of my other identities, in my day job as web editor for the University of Salford, I’ve never actually said, we’re going to make our pages WCAG1 compliant, but always said, you know, we’re going to take inspiration from WCAG1, filter it through our own knowledge of what the technology landscape actually is today, and try to do the best we can to actually serve the users and you know, how they currently use the web.

Paul: So….so are you, you know, you said that you’d never claimed in your day job, you know, to be WCAG1. Are you intending, you know, are you more confident in WCAG2 to be able to say that, that we’re going to be WCAG2 compliant, or is it not that kind of thing?

Patrick: I think …I think yes, WCAG2, it would be a lot easier to say we’re working towards WCAG2, because to kind of go back a bit and explain WCAG2’s kind of…the thinking behind WCAG2 and how it’s structured. WCAG2 as I said, doesn’t talk about HTML, CSS, it really just sets out very general principles, when then break down into guidelines, which then in turn break down into success criteria. Now again it probably sounds like there’s a whole new language to learn, but it is fairly straightforward, so if you think, web pages themselves need to be the four principles. They need to be perceivable, operable, understandable and robust. So those are the four kind of guiding principles, which you know, make sense. It was already implicit in WCAG1, but this kind of just spells it out. These are the kind of four things that we want to make sure. Now under each of those principles, say perceivable or whatever, there are guidelines which still provide…they don’t go into detail, but they provide some very, very basic overall goals, so what we want to achieve is X. They’re not testable, because they’re still very, very generic, they’re saying, we just want to make sure that people can, say, use a keyboard to do things. They don’t go into detail about what that means particularly. And then under that you’ve got the testable, what are called success criteria. Now these are very small kind of little atomic sentences if you will, that say, right, very specifically, if you’re providing this, then make sure that that happens. Now I’ll pull out an example, I’ve made some notes here, let me just go through…yeah, I’ll give you an example here. So in the big WCAG2 document, you’ve got principle number 2, operable. User interface components must be operable. So, you know, you can’t argue with that, fair enough. Underneath that, there’s loads of guidelines, I’ve pulled out one here, guideline 2.4, navigable, which states that you should provide ways to help users navigate, find content and determine where they are. Again, that’s a very, very broad goal that doesn’t say anything about you need to use a link, you need to put title in here, or you need to make sure you use access keys. None of that. It basically just very generically tells you that. Now under Guideline 2.4, there’s loads of smaller success criteria. Now I’m just going to pull out one of them. The first one, 2.4.1, which basically is called bypass blocks, and I’m just going to read it straight from the thing, ‘a mechanism is available to bypass blocks of content that are repeated on multiple web pages’

Paul: Yes

Patrick: Now again, this doesn’t say anything about HTML or whatever, but it is quite testable. You can actually pull up your web pages and say, right, are we following this? Is there a mechanism available to bypass blocks of text, blocks of content, sorry, that are repeated? So I don’t know if that gives a flavour of…

Paul: Yeah it does.

Patrick: …against WCAG1. Now you couldn’t write a validator to actually just run through this and check for that, that is one of the core differences I think with WCAG2 compared to WCAG2. I mean even WCAG1 we all agreed that you can’t just run it through Bobby and then, you know, if Bobby gives you the thumbs up, that’s good. You still have to do some manual checking. But there were a lot of things that because it was so HTML-centric, you could pretty much run it through something and it gave you a fairly good indication of whether you were achieving that particular check-point in WCAG1 or not. Now the way the success criteria are worded, yes you could say, OK, if we accept that, we want a skip link, and the skip link will fulfil that particular success criterion, we could write an automated tester that just looks for skip-links, the presence of skip-links, however you want to code that, but it’s not to say that that is the only way in which you can pass that success criterion. The actual guidelines don’t say exactly what you’re supposed to do. They pretty much focus on the end result and particularly what I’m interested in, they focus on the end result for the user for the most part, so it really puts the onus on the developer to understand, these are the user needs, and this is the kind of very generic thing that needs to happen. You can then, from that success criteria, jump over to the techniques document for instance, which actually goes into detail, if you’re using HTML, here’s some of the ways in which you could achieve this success criterion, and then you can test against those, but the techniques document is only informative, it’s not the be-all and end-all. You could follow whatever’s said in there, or you could actually come up with something that’s completely separate, is not mentioned anywhere in the techniques, but if the end result of an actual real user is still, OK, they can still bypass blocks of text that way, then that’s fine.

Paul: Which is great, because it kind of gives people the freedom to innovate and come up with original ways of solving accessibility problems.

Patrick: Absolutely, and it puts…it puts the focus straight back on doing something that is good for the user, rather than right, we’re just going to go and make sure that we tick that particular box because the guideline says we need to do X in HTML and, well, we’ve done it, so we’re cool. This kind of forces you to actually think about solutions. I mean you can… you can go into the techniques document, and what’s mentioned in the techniques document, is pretty much they’re tried and tested ways in which that situation has been solved, so you know, you can be I’ll say lazy, but you know, you can get guidance from that techniques document, but that’s the important thing to know, is it doesn’t mean that you have to necessarily use one of those techniques, and absolutely you’re right, this will stimulate a lot more creative kind of ways in which these success criteria can actually be met. And as I said, it then applies to any technology. You could say, right I’m going to provide that functionality in Flash if I’m doing Flash, or maybe I need to do that in PDF, or whatever, so it is a lot more open. Which obviously is a problem if you’re very set in the ways of I’m going to run it through a validator, and I’m going to get a clear yes or no answer, because you pretty much need either a lot of user testing to say, OK are the users actually able to do this particular thing that the success criterion says, or you get experts that kind of help you with that, and there it’s a lot more likely that you’re going to get 2 or 3 experts and they might not necessarily agree on what’s the best way to implement something, so that is kind of…not the problem I would say, but the slight shift in mentality that website designers and website owners will have to make, that it’s less easy to make a very kind of cut and dried, yes it’s accessible, not it’s not accessible. I mean it was problematic before, now it could be even more woolly, which you know, is a bad thing in a way, but also a good thing because it does force you really to focus on the actual core of the problem rather than trying an easy way out and just implementing some mark-up that a guideline suggests.

Paul: Yeah, I mean yeah, I can see how it potentially might create some legal problems further down the line, but it certainly gets people beyond that kind of arse-covering check-box mentality, which has good to be good. So it sounds like a lot of the time we’re kind of going to be working as web designers on the success criteria level where we’re going through and making sure we conform with these various success criteria. What about priorities? WCAG1 had Priority A, AA, AAA or whatever you want to call it; Priority 1, Priority 2, Priority 3. I mean, did, you know, is there anything like that any more or has that gone away completely?

Patrick: No, that’s actually still there. At one point there was a bit of a change in terms of how it’s going to be worded, whether you could achieve full compliance or not by following…having to do all the success criteria for a particular level or not, but no, they’re pretty much there in their old form if you will, so it’s still called Level A, AA and AAA. One of the things that WCAG2 has tried to do in its wording of these Levels is to say that it wants to remove the kind of idea of hierarchy that AA aren’t less important than A, and AAA aren’t less important than AA. They’ve written a lot of nice words around it to explain why it’s actually still worth doing AAAs when you’re not fulfilling all of AA etc, but I think they’ve actually muddied up the waters a bit because in effect, you can’t claim, say, AAA, if you haven’t claimed AA, so the hierarchy is actually still there, so probably this explanation was quite confused, but it actually reflects exactly how confused the WCAG2 document is about that. They’ve tried to kind of have their cake and eat it at the same time, I think, because they have to…necessarily have some hierarchy, but they’re really trying to stress that they’re all equally important, you know, but some are just more important than others. So…interesting.

Paul: Yes. So I mean what, you know, we’ve got potentially, you know, if you’re right, until about Christmas to sort out our act and to kind of really get thinking about WCAG2. What kind of steps would you recommend for people that are owning and running websites in order to kind of prepare for this?

Patrick: I would say that because WCAG2, as I say, is a whole suite of documents, you’ve got the actual guidelines which I mean now I can read them and they’re quite understandable to me, but I’m obviously very close to the subject at hand. I can kind of understand where they’re coming from. But as part of the suite of documents, there are kind of better documents possibly to start with, depending on what your current level is. There are ….there are simple things like Understanding WCAG2, which kind of takes a helicopter view of WCAG2 and gives a lot more context that explains why, you know, certain guidelines are important, how, you know, people will use them, how they will benefit from them etc. It goes more of a context. It’s obviously a lot weightier than the actual core guidelines, but that is…if you’re a bit rusty with, you know, I haven’t looked at WCAG2 at all, you’re a bit rusty with what WCAG1 even was about, beyond just being a document that you checked some boxes against, that’s certainly worth reading, just to really get a feel of understanding why….why are we changing things, why wasn’t WCAG1 good enough, so that really gives you a good kind of introduction to the subject. And I think that’s an important step towards actually implementing WCAG2 would be for people to buy in, as with anything, if you’re trying to push it through at an organisational level. People need to understand the rationale behind it. You can’t just dump this document on say your developer’s desk and say, right, these are the new rules, you know, white is black, black is white, this is what you need to do now. They need to buy in from actually understanding what the rationale behind it is, so the understanding document will really give them all the information they need. Some, you know, technically minded people might be tempted to jump straight to the techniques document, which is fine, but again with the caveat that I mentioned before that the techniques document is actually only informative, so whatever’s written in there is not the law. Some techniques that are currently in there might even be proven later on to be maybe not optimal in certain situations etc, so it’s not the law; it can help you initially get, if you’re really technically minded, you might read the success criteria and say, yeah, OK, that’s all nice language, but what does it actually mean, you know, if I’m doing HTML, what….what are you expecting me to do? The techniques document can help, it will give you actual examples. If you’re using HTML do this, if you’re using Flash do that, etc, so it brings it back down to something that as a techie, you might be more comfortable with, but again, understand
ing that that is not the law; those are not the guidelines, and that there might be even better or more creative ways around the problems, but it’ll get you into the right frame of mind I would say.

Paul: Cool

Patrick: There’s also documentation that just pretty much compares WCAG2 to WCAG1,

Paul: Ah, that’s good

Patrick: Yeah, if you’ve got a lot of experience with WCAG1, that will kind of help you roughly map, you know, what used to be WCAG1’s check-point about this, is now this far broader guideline that covers a lot more aspects, so it’ll help you kind of move towards the thinking behind WCAG2. And I think that is the main thing as a website owner or as a designer; it’s more of a shift in perception if you will, more of a shift of understanding of what accessibility is, more than, you know, the change of how is my mark-up now going to be affected by it. It’s really moving beyond that kind of very HTML specific, you must do exactly this, to a more, you need to understand how users actually use your website and how to creatively kindly of help them in that pursuit really.

Paul: Cool. I mean that sounds good; there’s lots of different ways you can kind of start the process of learning it

Patrick: Absolutely

Paul: …which is good. I mean I guess my last question, you’ve almost kind of answered, which is, you know, if you’re somebody from a WCAG1 background that is comfortable with WCAG1, the one thing that you’re thinking is, hang on a minute, I kind of knew this, I had my head around this, you know, I’ve suddenly got to change to this new system, you know, is it going to involve more work, is it going to be painful? The fact that you’ve talked about this document that does transition, you know, between WCAG1 and WCAG2 sounds helpful. Overall, do you think it’s going to put more pressure on designers or is…more going to be expected of them as they develop stuff?

Patrick: I think it’s going to be interesting for a variety of reasons. I wouldn’t say necessarily there’s going to be more work involved. If you’ve been working similar to the way I’ve been working, that you take WCAG1, you take what you want from it, and you filter it through your knowledge of, yeah, that screen-readers can actually work well with PDFs, so I’m ignoring the non-W3C technologies I’ve banned that used to be in WCAG1, so if you’ve actually been doing accessibility based on WCAG1 in the real world rather than simply just following it as a set of check-points that you just tick the boxes, I wouldn’t say it’s going to be more work. Certainly if on the other hand, if you have been somebody who hasn’t been too understanding or involved with WCAG, you pretty much had it as a function in your, say, Dream…copy of Dreamweaver or whatever, I’ll just quickly run it through this validator, I’ll run it through Bobby, although Bobby’s now gone, thank God, various things like that, you know, if you really just saw it as a check-box exercise, yes there will be…it will be more of….I don’t want to say paradigm shift…well there you go, I just said it….absolutely, no cliché will be left unturned in this particular episode…you really need to start understanding it more. But if you’ve actually been doing what I would term in a quite elitist way, real web accessibility over the last few years, there’s no major, major big surprises there, and there’s…I wouldn’t say there’s a lot more work involved. Now it would be interesting, I think, one of the aspects will be if you’ve been working in an organisation and you’ve been trying to appease management say, and one of the things that management might have erroneously picked up is, we need to make sure our pages are Bobby-compliant, for instance, is that will be a difficult, I would say, or challenging, should we say, situation because you will have, already at the time you might have been crying, saying, well, the validator can’t check everything, you still need to do manual checks, but at the end of the day, some managers, all they wanted was to see the thumbs up and the smiling policeman with the helmet on their website. This time around it will be a lot more difficult, and yes, as I mentioned before, there will be automated tools that will help you in determining whether you’re doing certain things right according to WCAG2, but because, as I said, the techniques…there is no definitive list of techniques that are OK, and there are no definitive lists of techniques that aren’t OK, it’s practically impossible to write an automated checker that will be able to check against everything, so tools…automated tools will really just be relegated to certain interpretations of WCAG2. I know that there’s a few organisations in the States that are currently working on, you know, validators. I think the….name escapes me now, but the Fraunhofer Institute in Germany, they’re currently working on their own version of a WCAG2 accessibility tester for instance, and I had an interesting discussion with representatives from Fraunhofer the other week when I was in Germany at a conference, and they’d pretty much agreed that their tool will only check against, basically, their favourite techniques if you will, from the techniques document. Now who’s to say, as we said before, that those are the best techniques? They’re ours. You might come up with a really creative way that no tool has been primed to kind of sniff out in your mark-up or in your Flash or PDF or whatever, so you’ll always get a very, very subjective, based on what the developer’s written into their tool, very subjective assessment of your website, so bring it back to the point, it will be extremely difficult I think for a manager to be able to say, right, I just want to make sure that we pass that particular test, unless you then go and dig out exactly what that tool is looking for, and you end up back in the situation that we used to be in, where you’re trying to write it to get a good grade from a tool, rather than actually thinking about what is best for, you know, users with disabilities or users in general, so that, I think that will be the more challenging part, as I said, the paradigm shift, getting managers who might not have understood it up to now, to really kind of confront the fact that automated tools aren’t the be-all and end-all, and that yes, everything is a lot more subjective now, so really I would say the only solution to that is really start thinking more exclusively about proper user testing, getting actual end-users in there. You could give them the success criteria from WCAG2 and basically say, can you confirm that this is something that you can do on our website, so it becomes a lot less about automation and a lot more about actual end users.

Paul: Cool. I mean it all sounds really exciting, you know, a bit apprehensive, you know, a whole new thing to learn and all the rest of it, but I think the whole freedom of approach side of things, that you can approach problems in different ways and sold things in different
ways, is very refreshing and it all sounds really exciting. Patrick, thank you so much for coming on the show, that’s been really enlightening, and I look forward…

Patrick: a delight

Paul: Yes, and I look forward to getting you on again, maybe to get into some specifics once WCAG2 is up and running. Good to talk to you.

Patrick: Yes, super duper. Okey-doke.

Thanks to Alison “Anna’s Mum” Debenham for transcribing this interview.

Listeners feedback:

What are the key features of a CMS

Hi Paul. Hi Marcus. What in your opinion are the important and fundamental features of a CMS, not such as the ability to create pages, but the add-on features that make a CMS better than other CMS’s around it. Thank you very much for answering my question.

Interestingly Drew Mclellan was talking about content management systems at this years @Media. He had an excellent list of things to look for in a CMS. Some of his recommendations were…

Friendly URLs
Data Feeds(RSS)
Customisable and accessible administration interface
Well implemented search
Multi-site support
Multi-language support
Caching
Support for user generated content

Interestingly some of the features he looks for (such as friendly urls) are not always required. He wants to see them there because it indicates best practice from the developers who built the system, not because he actually needs them.

He also spoke in his presentation about the importance of not buying a CMS based on a wish list of functionality you might need one day. This will lead to unnecessary expense. It is also the problem with ‘off the shelf content management systems’. You end up buying functionality you don’t require and introducing additional complexity into the user interface. Perhaps that is the reason why both edgeofmyseat.com (Drew’s company) and Headscape have chosen to build their own CMS codebase, which can be customised to clients needs.

If you are looking for more information on the selection of a content management system be sure to check out episode 24 where we dedicate the entire show to the topic.

Is certification worth it?

Chris asks: I’ve been working in web design for the last 5 years and am really looking to get into the more user experience side of things. I was wondering if you or our listeners knew of any qualifications or certifications that might be a good idea. Are they even worth the good idea in the first place or are they not worth the paper they were written on?

As somebody who regularly recruits user experience designers I have to say that qualifications and certifications mean little. Sure, I like an employee to have a degree simply because it demonstrates a certain level of academic achievement. However, I don’t think that web specific qualifications count for a huge amount.

What I consider important is example work, that shows your skills in user interface design. I want to see sites you have produced and for you to explain to me the underlying thought process that went into them.

Given a choice between work experience with a high profile web agency or becoming a student again, I would recommend the former every time.

118. Geo

Posted in Classic shows on May 20, 2008 by Paul Boag

On this weeks show we look at geocoding, Tom Coates talks about Fire Eagle and find out how we achieved the tabbed menu effect on the Headscape website.

Download this show.

Launch our podcast player

News and events

New tools for web designers on the way

A few months ago the guys over at clear:left put up a holding page for an application called Silverback. Exactly what Silverback was became a topic of much discussion and a considerable amount of buzz.

This week Andy Budd has finally revealed exactly what Silverback is on his blog. He describes as…

An OSX application to help people run their own low-cost Guerrilla usability tests. It captures screen activity, records audio and video from your built in iSight, and then composites it into a handy Quicktime movie for later use.

I have been fortunate enough to play with an early beta and I have to say it’s a great idea. It has the edge on other "screen capture” programs because it is designed specifically with usability testing in mind. For example, you don’t need to export the movies as soon as they are recorded. You can save them until you have finished a day of testing when more time is available.

If you ever do user testing get yourself over to the Silverback site and signup for the beta.

It would of course be remiss of me not to mention GetSignOff.com as we are on the subject of tools for web designers. Like clear:left Headscape have been developing an application and this week we provided our first walkthrough showing exactly what it does.

In essence GetSignOff is a web application that allows you to present designs to clients in a more professional manner, manage the feedback you receive from them and organise the multiple iterations of each design.

To really get a sense of what it does you need to view the screencast so be sure to check it out.

Effective online delivery of video

There can be no doubt in anybodies mind that online video is huge. It has taken a long time to arrive but with broadband so widespread it is now a reality. Increasingly users are expecting video content from websites and it is up to us as web designers and owners to deliver.

Delivery is fairly straightforward when you can use sites like YouTube or Vimeo. However, that is not always possible. Constraints on size and quality can make these services unsuitable. Not to mention their over demanding terms of use. So what do you do if you are forced to host and deliver video yourself?

My advise is to read an excellent article on the Digital Web Magazine that looks at the various approaches for delivering video over the internet. It explains concepts like progressive download, RTMP streaming and HTTP streaming. It is a superb source of information for anybody who has to host and deliver their own video content.

Some Javascript slight of hand

Our next story is some slight of hand by Robert Nyman.

I find myself increasingly using Javascript to show and hide content. However, being a well behaved standards designer I have to be careful how I build pages. I avoid hiding content with CSS because if I do and Javascript is disabled, users have no way to show the content again. Instead I use Javascript to hide the content so that if it is disabled the hidden elements will show by default.

The downside is that you can get flashes of content because Javascript has to wait for the page to fully load before it can hide content.

Fortunately Robert has come up with a nifty little workaround where he uses Javascript to load a CSS file, which in turn hides the content. This happens before the body has been loaded avoiding the flash of content.

If like me you occasionally suffer from content appearing when it should not, then bookmark this approach for later use.

Overcoming creative block

Our final news story today is a post on overcoming creative block. Creative block is something we all suffer from whether our job is perceived as being a creative one or not. Every job requires some degree of creativity and we all know what it feels like to stare blankly at a computer monitor unsure of where to begin.

This post provides a list of excellent tips on how to overcome brain freeze from going for a walk to throwing away the piece you like most. It really is a superb read. Another one to bookmark for the next time your creative juices fail to flow.

Surprisingly he has missed my number one technique, sitting on the toilet… or is that just me?

Feature: Location Aware

The web is full of exciting innovations at the moment. However, it is geocoding that personally excites me the most. In this weeks feature I explain what it is and why I believe it offers so much potential.

Interview: Tom Coates on Fire Eagle

Paul: Ok, so joining me today is Tom Coates from Yahoo. Good to have you hear Tom

Tom: Nice to be here

Paul: So I’ve just been hearing from Tom that he’s got a massive line up of interviews to do for a product that he’s been involved with called Fire Eagle. So he’s talking to the Guardian, the BBC and lots of important people, but thank you for sparing a few minutes to talk to us too. We’re very honoured.

Tom: No problem at all.

Paul: So, lets kick off for those who haven’t come across Fire Eagle before. I think you talked about it at dConstruct last year.

Tom: Yes

Paul: That was when I first heard about it, perhaps you could tell our listeners a little bit more about what it is, and what it does.

Tom: So Fire Eagle is a service that helps you share information about your location, online. So that’s both for people, and more importantly for different sites and services. The other side of it is that it sort of fixes a problem with the development community for the use of applications that use your location. In that it makes that process much easier. So in principal, it means that from a user’s perspective, you can capture information about your location and use it in lots of different places. And from a website owners perspective you can start to think about how your service can respond to someone in the world without having to do a lot of donkey work.

Paul: So it’s not primarily, in itself, like another web application like Twitter where you’ve got to sign up for and take part in it? I
t’s more of a API framework type of thing.

Tom: Well, when you think about it, it is both, because if you think about it as a place to sort of store information about your location. We give you the tools to go in and update that information, decide who to share it with, and manage that information. So in some ways it’s like your location preference page, which helps you control that information. So yes you do sign up for it, it uses a Yahoo ID, the same one you use for Upcoming and Flickr, but really, once you’ve started capturing your location or sharing it with particular services, you don’t really need to come back. We’re not trying to build a sexy fun service for day-to-day use, but we’re trying to make something that makes it easier for you to build, and other people to use, services.

Paul: OK, so how exactly does the service work Tom. I’ve seen other location based stuff where you have to do horrible things like enter grid references or terrible stuff like that. How do you use Fire Eagle?

Tom: What you do with the site, is you go to the site, and you log in with your Yahoo Id and you do a simple terms of service thing, which asks how often you want to be reminded that you’re sharing your location. From that moment on you’re up and running. The simplest thing to do, is go to a web page called where am I, and you can type in your address and, we will work out where you are in the world, and we’ll plonk it on a map. Now that in itself isn’t terribly interesting. So the interesting thing about it, is that we’ve opened up the API’s so that anyone in the world can build something that could update your location, and anyone in the world could build something that could use your location. So we have an application gallery, and you could go along to that, and on that at the moment there are services like Navizon, which work out where your location is by nearby wifi signals. Or Loki which is from SkyHook the same people who power the iPhone location thing, and Dopler and all kinds of stuff. You can tell those services that you’re OK sharing that information with Fire Eagle. So I have an application on my phone at the moment from Navizon that works out where I am every 10 minutes and tells Fire Eagle where I am. So that location just sits in Fire Eagle and then I can decide to share it with people. So as an example a plug-in for movable type that Ben Trott has built and that means that you can put on your blog, a little map of where you are right now which is quite fun. What we do is, to help maintain your privacy, you choose which services you’re comfortable with sharing your location with, or get an update from. You can say to what level of granualarity you’re comfortable sharing with it. So you can say, just share my city, or my state (if you’re in America) or your neighborhood or your exact point. Then you can hide information at any time, or delete all information in the system.

Paul: Oh, OK.

Tom: So basically it means that you would go and find one really good way to get where you are, or lots of little ones all around the place that compliment each other, and sort it out into the middle of this little repository of data, that you can then say, yes I’d like to use this on Flickr, or on Facebook, or on moveable type, or wherever.

Paul: So the way you’re describing it is that there are multiple entry points into it, where you type in your exact location, weather it’s your mobile phone updating it?

Tom: Yes

Paul: You know I even noticed from looking at the site that you can now Twitter your location in.

Tom: Yes

Paul: And that there are multiple output points, where it’s going to Movable Type, or to wherever else.

Tom: Yes

Paul: So what type of things are we going to see with this. What are you expecting people to develop? Is there any cool stuff at the moment that you can tell us about?

Tom: Yeah, well there are a fair number of cool things that have already come out, which is kind of interesting. I mean one of the things on the engineering side – so there is a bit of a problem with location based services, and everyone’s been talking about it for a very long time, you know they have all these kinds of things that you couldn’t find friends more easily, or find out things about your neighbourhood or whatever. And the problem is, and has always been, that it’s quite hard because what you have to do is, every time you want to use an application like that, you have to install another application on your phone, or go through another extended rigmarole about how to do it. So our plan is that we take that away, so what you basically do is you find any piece of software that gets your location usefully, and you install it, and it updates Fire Eagle. So from that moment on any application in the world that is Fire Eagle enabled can go and get that. So any website in the world could respond to where you are, without ever having to build the thing that works out where you are. So some examples – Navizon as I said is this lovely little application that runs on most mobile phones, captures your location. There is a thing called Fire Bot, which is a Twitter Bot, and on that one you can do a Twitter direct message, with a text string of where you are. So you can say I’m in San Francisco, or I’m in London, or I’m in.. as I am now, at Yahoo’s offices at 125 Shaftesbury Avenue. And you can type that in and you can then share that with all the applications you’re comfortable with. We’ve also taken Cell ID information, so if you have a mobile phone, many of those on a technological side expose the Cell ID. So that’s the tower, or mobile phone mast kind of thing. Quite a lot of people are doing interesting mappings based on that. That in particular is at a very early stage so we don’t actually get much good information from that, but, you know we do take in all different types of data. You could have a GPS log coming from a mobile phone, or anything that could get long/lat coordinates, or anything that could get text string of the place you’re in. On the other side, is the things that could use it, which is where the fun starts. There are all kinds of things that people have built. And more coming. So there is a service that Leonard Lin, the founder of Upcoming made for us, called FireBall, and FireBall was particularly useful in San Francisco in the last couple of weeks because of the Web 2.0 Expo that was out there.

Paul: Oh yeah.

Tom: And the idea with that was you could either send a Twitter message of where your location was, or if you were getting it from FireEagle, it would automatically use that. And at any point you could say "Where are my friends” and it would go to Twitter, find out all your Twitter friends and plonk them on
a map for you. And you could do that on the iPhone as well because it would send you a file that could then be opened by the Google maps thing. So you could literally call your little maps thing on the iPhone and it would say "Here’s where all your friends are”, which is really lovely, and really nice, because it’s all about your friends there.

We’re building a Facebook App, this is no particular secret, we’ve talked about this before, and its going to be one that means you can decide to share your location on Facebook with your friends, which is going to be quite fun. A guy called Simon Willison who I used to work with, who has built a thing called WikiNear. There are over a million geo-coded articles in Wikipedia, which basically means someone has put in the longitude and latitude of where the thing talked about in the article is. So Simon’s thing is a little web page for your mobile phone, and you bring it up and it says "Here are the 5 nearest interesting things to you”.

Paul: Cool!

Tom: Which is pretty fun, so you can wander around London and here’s the British Museum and you can click on that to go to the media wiki page to talk about that.

Um, there are other things like that, I mean LightPole is a little company that we’ve been working with. They’re doing things like local services around you, which again is mobile phone focused. A company called Outside.In, they do things like try to work out where all the blog posts and news stories are about, and they can bring that information to you if they know where you are – and they are going to get some of that information from FireEagle – which is really cool. So as I said we’ve got this Moveable Type thing. So there are all kinds of stuff that is going on at the moment. We build these wonderful little widgets, which I really like, they are for OS 10, and one of them is a little updater. You can type in your location, press a little button and it will update it to FireEagle. One of them tells you the weather where you are right now. So if you travel a lot, it will give you the weather forecast of where you are. And one of them shows you nearby flickr photos, so it just goes and gets those geocoded photos from Flickr and gives you every day a little photo montage of all the cool things that are going on around you. So lots of interesting new uses really.

Paul: It’s interesting you mentioned Flickr. I mean you can imagine the reverse of what you just described with Flickr, so if your location is been taken each time, it would know the location where you took that picture and geo-code that picture on Flickr. Is that the kind of thing that you’re planning to do?

Tom: I mean there are a lot of really interesting uses based around geo tagging. So whenever I write a blog post, it would be really awesome if my Moveable Type blogger could go and look up on FireEagle where I was, and say "This article was entered here”. So you could say "What do you think about Gordon Brown in Edinburgh” as apposed to "What do you think about Gordon Brown in London” or "Wales”, and that would be really fun as a good way of slicing through this enormous amount of blog posts that are out there.

Twitter messages as well, that would be lovely – it would be really great if every time you wrote a Twitter message they went and grabbed your location, and you could say, well I want to explore the public conversations going on in my neighborhood right now. That would be lovely. Um, and with Flickr as well, when you click on a photo on your phone, uploading it immediately. If you havn’t got the location on that device, being able to get it from FireEagle would be really useful. And you know obviously whatever amount of information they can get, so perhaps FireEagle only knows you’re in London, that’s still useful – you know you can still help people find photos just because they are in London. Or if they are at an exact point that’s also good. The only thing about Flickr is that often people take photos and upload them later. And at the moment because we want to make sure that we’ve thought about all the implications, and we don’t want to weird any one out, we’re making sure that we don’t keep any ones history.

Paul: Oh Ok

Tom: So it’s literally just your current location we look after for you.

Paul: Ah, that’s good.

Tom: Yeah we’ve talked to a lot of people about this, and we have been very careful about the privacy and control. These are the two watch words of the project. We are incredibly conservative, we don’t want to worry’s any one out. So at any time you can press a button to hide your information. Information will still come into FireEagle, but it won’t go out. Or you can delete all your information on FireEagle at one time, so we won’t keep any records at all if you do that. At the moment we don’t keep any location history at all – any tracking, or location history there. And we even by default will send you an email once a month saying "Are you still OK sharing”, and if you don’t reply to the email, or you don’t click on the link in the email, then we’ll stop immediately. It’s just so there is no risk of you doing anything, you know, accidently, exposing it in ways you’re not comfortable with.

Paul: I mean when I first heard you talk about this it struck me as hugely exciting, that location based information is an area that I’m massively excited about. And I think there is so much potential to add a new level of context, you know, on the data that we see on the web. Something that has been very much lacking since the beginning. And there is so much potential here, for pretty much anyone listening to this show, whether you’re a design or a web site owner.

Tom: Yeah

Paul: So where would people start to find out more information about this. Where’s the good place to begin?

Tom: OK, so one of the parts of the project that took surprisingly the most time, was actually making sure that the documentation was really good. At the moment it’s an invitation only service, so we have a few thousand people using it and testing it at the moment. We’re opening it up to more invitations pretty regularly. It’s only been out in the wild about 6 weeks. So if you’re interested in using FireEagle, just go to the website, put your email address in the box, and over the next few weeks we’ll be sending out more invitations.

Paul: And what’s the website address?

Tom: Oh, it’s FireEagle.com

Paul: OK

Tom: So that should be nice and easy to find. On that site, if you can get an invitation, and if anyone spots us around the
place, ask us, because we have little cards we can give out. There is extensive documentation on how it works, that really falls into two big chunks. Partly it’s this use of this new standard called OAuth. Which is a really good way, meaning sites can talk to each other on behalf of users, and you can set your preferences around that. So getting your head around OAuth is really useful because so many services – I think Google and Yahoo have both announced that there is going to be support for OAuth as a standard now. So that’s really great, we’re all really happy about that. And the other side, is the FireEagle APIs themselves, which are very simple, sort of three main ones. 1. Where is the user. Again, all of this only happens if the user has given explicit permission for this service to see it.

Paul: Sure

Tom: One is update the location of the user, and one is ambiguous query, so such as, you say you’re in London, which is great, but there are hundreds of London’s in the world. So there is one service where it says "which London” and you can say "this one”. So they are the three core queries , it is very very simple. We have another couple of ones, for particular web services, to bring back users of my application within that particular area, like SOHO or London.

Paul: Yep

Tom: Another one, bring back the hundred who have updated their location most recently. So just think, just to make it easier for developers to build useful services.

Paul: Cool, that just sounds really exciting, and I can’t wait to see some of the stuff that is developed in the future. Tom, thanks so much for coming on the show.

Tom: No problem, I hope that was useful

Paul: That was incredibly useful, and I’m sure there will be a lot of people hounding you for invites, well there probably already are thousands of people hounding you for invites. Have you got any idea when it’s going to go "Full Open”?

Tom: Yes, I do have an idea when it’s going to go full open.

Paul: But you’re not going to tell me.

Tom: Well its within the next couple of months. We want to make sure we’ve had conversations with some really interesting people, so that we have some really cool stuff to show off at the same time. So you’ll just have to wait and see on that line I’m afraid.

Paul: Oh, so that’s really exciting and thank you again for coming on the show.

Tom: No problems. Cool.

Thanks to Nathan O’Hanlon for transcribing this interview.

Give Away: Fire Eagle Invites

So as we mentioned in the interview, Fire Eagle is currently in beta, but if you can’t wait for the full release and want to get playing with it right away your in luck. We have around 20 invites available for boagworld listeners. To claim one, e-mail [email protected] with the subject heading of "Fire Eagle Invite" and Ryan will send you your code, while stocks last…

All tickets have now been claimed!

Listeners feedback:

Tabbed menus?

David Bridle writes: How did you get the tabbed menu to work in the headscape website?

When writing the answer to this question, it turning into quite a lengthy explanation. So I wrote a blog dedicated to it, which can be found here.

Question: Headscape tabs

Posted in Accessibility, Development on May 16, 2008 by Paul Boag

David Bridle writes: How did you get the tabbed menu to work in the headscape website?

The navigation on the Headscape website is built using the Javascript library jQuery. I have mentioned jQuery a number of times before so I won’t bother to repeat myself here.

I don’t claim to be a javascript expert but I have made Headscape as accessible as I know how. I am sure there will be people out there that could have done a better job but I will share what I did (for better or worse).

I am not going to get into too much code as I am not the right person to teach that. I also think it is more important to show you the techniques rather than post code that can be copy and paste into your own site. If you want to learn how to actually reproduce what I have done then I recommend the excellent documentation on the jQuery site or the designers guide to jQuery.

Choosing AJAX

It was important to me that the content found under each tab was accessible with Javascript disabled. My initial thought was to include all of the tabs in the page load. However, it quickly became obvious that this would make the download too large and would not allow for adding content in the future.

Eventually I concluded that I wanted to use AJAX. Using Jeremy Keith’s HIJAX approach I built one page for each of the case studies found under the tabs. I then linked to these from the homepage tabs using normal hrefs. Clicking on each tab would load the appropriate page.

Each of these individual pages were complete with a header and footer as well as the content I wanted to include on the homepage.

The Javascript

The next step was to create some javascript which prevented the default action of loading the entire page, and instead load only the portion I wanted.

This was achieved with a function that was triggered on clicking each tab. The function was attached unobtrusively (rather than included in the HTML itself) so I could easily remove it later if I wanted to alter the way the site worked.

The function carried out the following actions:

It captured the url of each link
$("#csMenu a").href
Append to the links the specific element I wanted to import using AJAX
var addr = $("#csMenu a").href + " #caseStudies
Load that content into the appropriate place on the page (which had the id = csCont)
$("#csCont").load(addr)
Applied some of the inbuilt effects in jQuery to make the animation fade in and out.
Prevented the default action
return false;

In reality it was slightly more complex because I needed to trigger additional functions to add a popup facility to some of the links within the imported content. However, fundamentally that was it.

The problem with AJAX

The only problem that remained were screen readers. Although the site worked with Javascript disabled the use of AJAX would confuse screen readers. Without getting too technical Screen readers are able to run Javascript but don’t always realize when AJAX has updated the page.

A lot of people cleverer than me have been struggling with this issue and failed to come up with a solution. That is why some developers such as Brothercake recommend against the use of AJAX.

I had good reasons for the choice of AJAX (which I won’t get into here) and so had to find a solution. This ended up being a simple hidden message telling screen reader users to disable Javascript. Thisl enable them to navigate the additional pages without problem. This message was the first item within the body tag and was hidden using CSS so it was only heard by Screen reader users.

No doubt I will receive criticism for this decision and to some extent rightly so. It presumes users know how to disable Javascript in their screen reader. Even if they do, it is not an ideal solution. Users should not be required to change preferences before they can view a site. However, the state of screen readers is far from ideal either, and it is was the best compromise I could find.

So there you have it. That is how I produced the tabs on the Headscape website. I would be fascinated to hear what other approaches people would have used. How could I have done it better?

116. Back

Posted in Classic shows on May 7, 2008 by Paul Boag

Returning with a new site. Jeff Croft talks about his view on web standards and we discover why the personal website is dead.

Podcast: Download (28.3MB)

Download this show.

Launch our podcast player

News and events

Creating grid layouts

Last month I attended the Future of Web Design conference. The speakers were exceptional, however my favorite was a presentation by Jon Hicks on his web development process. The guys at Carsonified are slowly releasing the videos so it wonʼt be long before you get to watch it yourself.

I find it interesting to see how people work and it is amazing how many new techniques you learn. One thing Jon shared was a Javascript library called GridLayouts that overlays a grid systems on top of your pages. This is useful when creating layouts directly in CSS because you can align elements to the grid.

I have since discovered there is a firefox extension called GridFox that does the same thing.

Flash goes open source

Of course, you might be wasting your time designing with CSS. According to Aral Balkan flash is soon going to be everywhere and is the platform we should now be developing on.

The reason for Aralʼs excitement is an announcement by Adobe that Flash is going open source. Not only will the swf format be open source, they are also relaxing the licensing on the flash player.

All of this is good for the flash platform. Although it is never going to replace HTML, it does undermine one of the main arguments used by its detractors.

Accessibility and AJAX

While Flash gets a shot in the arm its main competitor AJAX is under attack. Brothercake has written a passionate article for Operaʼs development site pleading with us to stop using AJAX.

His argument is that AJAX is immature and unnecessary in the majority of cases. He believes that the accessibility cost of using AJAX outweighs it benefits (many of which are oversold).

I cannot say I agree with everything he has written, but the article does make you pause and consider whether your implementation of AJAX has been entirely necessary. Coming within days of the WCAG 2.0 candidate release, I think this article puts accessibility firmly back on the agenda. It will be interesting to see what affect WCAG 2.0. has on the growth of AJAX and web 2.0.

Developing effective forum leadership

Our final news story is anything but web 2.0. because it focuses on the oldest of community tools, the forum. It is an article by Patrick O’Keefe entitled Develop Effective Forum Leadership.

The article is aimed at those website owners who run larger communities and need to provide guidance to their community leaders. I have worked with so many large organisations who have tried and failed to effectively run communities. Their failure is often down to bad decisions concerning moderation and management.

This article helps to address those issues providing solid advice. If you are a community manager or have clients who run (or want to run) a forum then this is a must read.

Feature: The personal website is dead

This week Zeldman mourned the decline of the personal site. Several responded rebutting the claim. In this weeks feature I explain why I agree with Zeldman but just don’t care.

Interview: Jeff Croft Talks About His View On Web Standards

Paul: OK. Joining me today is Jeff Croft, who no doubt you have heard of. Good to have you on the show Jeff

Jeff: Great to be here Paul, thanks for having me.

Paul: So you work for Blue Flavour, and I have to confess the reason why I wanted you on the show is because you do tend to court a little bit of controversy, shall we say, is that a fair comment?

Jeff: I suppose that’s a fair comment. I don’t necessarily do it on purpose, but it does seem to keep happening!

Paul: Well you say you don’t do it on purpose, but I’ve looked through your blog, and you have some excellent articles on there that are really good and really quite excited me. Not necessarily because I agreed with every word

Jeff: Sure

Paul: But what I like about what you do, Jeff, is that you challenge kind of the standards, you know, you challenge the standard thinking and you kind of come at things from a different angle. So…

Jeff: Right

Paul: As a result of this, you seem to have antagonised a few people, especially in the standards community. Why is that? What have you done and why…why do people find you so annoying, Jeff?

Jeff: Well I was going to ask you that same thing Paul!

Paul: Ha ha ha

Jeff: No, seriously, it’s a good question. Like I said, I won’t ever set out to antagonise anyone. I think sometimes, you know, people take opposing viewpoints on these industry matters, a little personally, that’s, you know, my opinion. I know I write in kind of a pointed way that sometimes is blunt and I tend to be the type of person who doesn’t always have a filter when maybe I should. But, you know, I love everyone in this community, everyone I’ve ever met in this community’s been awesome so I’m not…it certainly isn’t ever personal, but I think, dealing specifically with web standards, it sort of feels a lot like religion to me. Like I sort of see myself as a Protestant of sorts, like I…you know I came up as a firm believer in the dogma of web standards, but more recently I’ve sort of split off from the Church on a few key points, but in the end, I mean Catholics and Protestants are both Christians, right? And we read the same Bible which is, I suppose, designing with web standards, and so you know, just there’s….I usually sort people there’s probably 5% of stuff that I differ on than kind of the purist viewpoints. So I’d see it as a purist versus pragmatist sort of thing
and I like to write about it and I like to write in a kind of a blunt way that I guess sometimes rubs people the wrong way.

Paul: So you’d like to call yourself a pragmatist. Tell us a little bit about where you, you know, what areas you think that other people are being too purist over when it comes to web standards. What are the areas that get under your skin?

Jeff: Well the main thing is just that I don’t really consider…I never think of web standards as the end goal. I think of web standards as a means to the end, and so, you know, when I’m building a website my priorities are, you know, to serve the needs of the client and to create a great user experience, more than my priorities are to validate or to, you know, use all the right ….most semantic elements all the time. I mean I do try to do that, but it’s…those are just in support of the greater goals that I have and I think…sometimes I feel like peoples’ priorities get a little out of whack there, and that’s kind of the purist mentality that I’m talking about.

Paul: I mean the trouble is with writing posts like this, and this is something I get accused of as well, that when you say something like, well web standards, you know, are not the goal, they’re merely a means to an end and all the rest of it

Jeff: Right

Paul: Aren’t you actually encouraging lazy coding?

Jeff: Well I don’t think so. I can see how it seems that way. I mean I definitely do believe that everyone should be writing valid markup and CSS and I just encourage people to remember that web standards are simply tools to advocate, you know, to help achieve the end goal, and you know, if you’re…I don’t know, I guess it’s kind of hard to explain, but if, like…let me use an example. If you’re building a house, I don’t think anybody would have their goal be…I need to use a hammer, and nails and bolts when I’m building this house. I don’t think that would be anybody’s end goal. Their goal would probably be like, I’m going to build a house that is structurally sound and has spaces that serve the needs of the residents and it’s comfortable and it’s aesthetically pleasing. They’d probably have goals like that. And you know, they probably would use a hammer, nails and bolts, but I don’t think they’d probably get so bent out of shape about, well in this house I used, you know, 3½ inch long nails instead of 3 inch nails, but those are the kind of like sort of semantic and pedantic debates that we get into in the industry a lot that irritate me a little bit because I feel like sometimes people just don’t pay attention to, you know, somebody can redesign a site that can be beautiful and amazing, and they make a blog post about it, and they say, you know, this is a new project I’ve done and it’s got all this new innovative stuff and the comments on it are, well you didn’t encode your ampersands and you know, you used too many divs and just to me I’m just like, man you totally missed the point, you totally missed all the great stuff that is there about my site.

Paul: But I mean using your house example that you just gave

Jeff: Right

Paul: I mean, within, you know, construction there are standards. There are, you know, rules that have to be followed and it may be the case that the person that’s getting their house built for them doesn’t…don’t particularly care about those things, you know, they care about the aesthetics, they care about the living space, they care about that kind of stuff, but somebody has to care about, you know, the fact that it’s built to Fire Regulations and things like that. Is that not our job as a Designer to worry about things like that?

Jeff: I think it’s completely our job, I just think that it is our job to …to do those things and to create great user experiences and have beautiful designs and…and it’s mostly just a priorities thing, like it’s just…I think all those things are important. Validating and creating, you know, writing semantic mark-up, all these things are important to me, they’re just… they’re just tools that I use to reach greater goals is all….and I think some people in our industry have turned that around to where they are more interested in writing valid code than they are in creating great experiences.

Paul: Mmm. So do you actually think that there are situations where the, you know, these different objectives come into conflict, because you know, I can’t say that in my experience there have been many situations where you know, I’ve gone, you know, oh I can’t do that because it’ll make the code invalid or whatever, you know, where…or where, you know, I’ve had to over-rule a client because I feel that it would compromise, the, you know, the semantics of the website. They don’t often seem to come into conflict, but I mean do you disagree?

Jeff: No,….no I agree, they’re very rarely in conflict if ever. It’s…you know, it’s more what irritates me and what I have talked about is more it has to do with the discussion and the kind of….community, you know, within the web standards community it’s not something that really affects client work too much or anything like that, it’s just I want to talk about some other stuff; I want to talk about design and I want to talk about users and I want to talk about community and networking and bringing people together and sometimes I feel like those conversations can’t be had because they’re…because as soon as somebody starts to talk about something a little bit more abstract and conceptual, people derail the conversation by saying, again, like your ampersands are unencoded, or you know, why did you use all these divs when you could’ve, you know, been more semantic, or you know, whatever. So….it’s more about the conversation…yes

Paul: I’ve got to say, I can associate with your point of view, I mean at the moment I’m re-building the Headscape website, our corporate website, and you know, although obviously I should primarily be thinking about the client all the time and potential customers that are coming along to the site, after all, that’s the target audience, but you can’t help but almost be a little bit afraid, you know, that …oh is this code of good enough standard, are people going to criticise this, that and the other, and really you shouldn’t have to live your life in fear of what your peers will say.

Jeff: Exactly, that’s exactly wha
t I think.

Paul: But I mean from the point of view of…we were talking about lazy coding weren’t we, and about, you know, does this encourage lazy coding. You guys have taken an interesting position at Blue Flavour, and I have to say this…this is something I think I probably disagree with, which is that you guys use Blueprint, which is the CSS library, actually in a production environment. That’s interesting that you take that point of view. Explain a little bit about how you came to that…that point, you know that position.

Jeff: Well…well first of all I was sort of involved in the creation of Blueprint. It was…I was accidentally involved; I didn’t mean to be, but at my previous job I had…I had created a sort of CSS framework for us to use internally, it was a media company, a newspaper company and we had several different newspaper sites. They were all similar and we had a team of designers and we wanted to just sort of standardise on some….some class names and just some ways of coding things across our sites and across our team, so that you know, we would all kind of be on the same page, and I wrote an article on a A List Apart about that process and somebody found…somebody went and found that code and wrote me an e-mail asking if they could use it, and I said sure, I can’t support it, but if you want to use it, go ahead, and thinking that they were probably going to use it on their personal site or whatever, and it turns out what they’re actually going to do is build Blueprint. So that’s kind of how the whole thing happened and…so that’s how I got involved in it and I gotta say before I go any further that since then, Blueprint is very different from what I wrote and there’s been a lot of changes, and a lot of them are good but a lot of them I don’t like too, so I don’t….at this point in time I’m not as sold on Blueprint as I was three or four months ago just because of some of the changes they’ve made. But I think the reason, I mean the justification to me for using Blueprint or any CSS framework like that is the same justification that you would have for any Open Source project. It’s really good CSS written by smart people that has been tested by the masses, it’s constantly being updated, having bug fixes applied, and you know I believe that most of the time the Open Source community is going to be able to write better code than you or me or any one individual person, so to me that’s the justification, it’s the same reason I would use Apache or Django or Rails or Linux or anything Open Source because it’s just been proven time and time again that….that Open Source methodology works for having good code.

Paul: I mean, I have to say, I had a look at it and played with it for a bit, and I’ve got to say that for some stuff it was very impressive, you know, if you’re putting together wireframes or, you know, doing initial production work then I can see a value in it, but I think what concerned me was some of the limitations surrounded the fact that, you know, it’s designed primarily for a fixed based site, but also…sorry, is that…am I wrong?

Jeff: No, no, you’re absolutely right, although I think adding liquid is on their ‘to do’ list, but yes,

Paul: OK. And then…I mean the other thing was that, you know, I’m trying to avoid using the word ‘semantic’ in order not to get in trouble with you, but I mean the thing that did strike me with it is that there were a lot of class names that you were having to put in, you know, which is fine, you know, I can accept that, you know, it’s not the end of the world if you do that, but you know, if it’s a site that’s going to be around over the long term, I just felt it was a little bit of a second-rate solution for probably the type of clients I do. Now I can understand that if you’re doing, you know, a lower…you know, lower end work, smaller websites, with less of a budget and you need to turn things around quickly then this is better than not using standards at all, but it just felt a little bit of a lightweight solution. Am I being unfair to it?

Jeff: Nope, I don’t think you’re being unfair at all. I think you’re absolutely right and I think, you know, I mean at Blue Flavour, we have used Blueprint before, we don’t use it all the time, and it is…we do tend to use it in those situations where we have a very tight timeframe or a very tight budget, and just need to get things done and get them out the door as quickly as possible. Because like you said, I mean we think it’s a good solution that is better than not using web standards at all, but it’s…it’s never going to be as good as hand-crafting every line of code for, you know, for the particular project. We recognise that, but it’s, you know, sometimes in the real world, when we have deadlines and clients and budgets, sometimes just getting things done on, you know, an efficient way trumps being absolutely perfect every time which is again that pragmatist versus purist sort of view.

Paul: I mean it felt like a bigger compromise, and maybe…I’m using some other, you know, frameworks and libraries, you know, I just jQuery for example in JavaScript, and this felt more of a compromise, more of interfering with the kind of underlying content of the site, and that’s what I was probably slightly uncomfortable with, was the idea that, you know, the content would be in some ways compromised if the site was going to be around a long time, you know, if it was a shorter term project that maybe wasn’t around as long, then the fact that the content is somewhat compromised maybe is not as big a deal.

Jeff: Yeah, well I think, you know, when you were saying that I was thinking, you know, like you use jQuery, so do I. I think there’s a certain…like…those of us who are not great JavaScript people will lean on these frameworks, whereas I bet JavaScript gurus sometimes have the same feelings like about…it being a compromise when using one of those libraries, you know, and there’s probably people in the Ruby community that say, ‘oh, I’m not going to use Rails, it’s a compromise’, because they really know the ins and outs of Ruby or they really know the ins and outs of JavaScript and we really know the ins and outs of HTML CSS so yeah, I wonder if it’s always …these kind of libraries are always going to be a little more popular with people who are…who are like have to use CSS but it’s not really their primary area of expertise.

Paul: So what you’re implying is that I’m a snob?

Jeff: Sort of!

Paul: Ha ha ha…..that’s fair enough, that’s OK. I don’t mind being a snob! So I’ve….so moving on from that then a little bit

Jeff: OK

Paul: Now I’ve read some stuff that you’ve written before critical of validators and you know, some of these automated validators that are out there. Maybe tell us a little bit about why you’re critical of them, why you feel so anti towards them?

Jeff: Well it’s not so much that I’m opposed to the validators, I mean on the contrary actually I use validators almost every single day. What I’m critical of is the way people use them sometimes. I think that, you know, validators are there for…as a tool to help you de-bug during the development process, you know, you have some problem on your page and why isn’t it working? When you validate you find the error and then that helps you move along to solving it. But what irritates me is the use of validators as sort of in unprovoked attacks on other peoples’ code, you know, where again, it’s kind of that same…that same mentality of somebody launches their new site and the first thing somebody does is view source and validate it, so that they can then make a comment that says, you know, this is crap, and that is…that is really irritating. I feel like there’s almost never any reason to validate someone else’s code, I mean unless they’ve asked you to, I can’t understand why….it’s just that mentality of the first thing you do when you get to a site is view source is a little baffling to me, because I’m…I’m more interested in the design and the functionality and what are they doing here that’s new and interesting.

Paul: I guess…but that depends…surely that depends on your priorities, I mean…you know, I find it quite interesting to look at other people’s code and how they’ve built the site. It doesn’t necessarily mean I’m going to validate it.

Jeff: Right, and….no and I mean that’s fine, I do that at times as well and that’s certainly how I learned a lot of what I know, but I don’t do it with the intention of then picking apart every single error they made publicly, which is really the thing that bothers me.

Paul: I have to say the other thing that concerns me a little bit about this is I’m starting to see more clients going and viewing source and validating websites and you know, it’s quite difficult, because I mean obviously like yourselves, we kind of sell ourselves on, you know, being standard based designers and produce good quality code and all the rest of it; it’s part of our sales package. And you know, when a client goes along and validates one of our client sites and it’s invalid, you know, you feel like you have to defend yourself in some way, but, you know, there are good reasons why a site won’t validate sometimes, and…and certainly once a client starts using a content management system you can pretty much kiss goodbye to it can’t you really?

Jeff: In many of them, yeah.

Paul: OK. That’s…it’s interesting to hear a little bit about the way that you operate and the kind of priorities that you have at Blue Flavour. In some of the posts that you’ve put up, I mean you were kind enough to send through a big bunch of your more controversial posts to me which was good. And I was reading through some of them, really enjoying them by the way, but there seemed to be this kind of under-lying current that maybe standards and even the W3C to some extent, a kind of stifling innovation. Where does this kind of feeling come from, you know, is that something you really, really believe and what makes you believe it?

Jeff: I would say again it’s not so much that I think that the W3C themselves or the standards themselves are stifling innovation; it’s the culture of compliance that is around those standards and around the web standards community to where people are so obsessed with being valid and being compliant all the time that they…you know, they tend to…I think it even extends past actually writing mark-up or writing CSS to where people just keep doing things the same way that everybody else is doing them or the way that Jeffrey Zeldman told them is the way to do things, or whatever, and it just kind of….they just keep doing things the same way and not innovating as much as I would like to see. Now I say that, and I…but I know I probably do the same thing myself, like I don’t…I’m not always incredibly innovative either, so…so it’s kind of, you know, it’s a balance there. But I think….I think also, I mean…and this might be a little bit of difference in my viewpoint too, is when I really thing of web standards, the web standards movement, I think about the browsers. I think the…gold web standards movement was to get the browsers all rendering standards correctly and supporting standards, which for the most part has been done, I mean granted there are still little problems here and there, and IE isn’t totally there, but at least we know that they’re on board now. I don’t think of web standards movement so much as being a thing where we’re getting the developers all on board. I mean I guess that’s part of it too, but when I think about the web standards movement when I was, you know, when I was first involved in it four or five years ago or however long it was, to me it was all about the browsers, and so, you know, today I think there’s a sort of chicken and egg problem where…browser makers could be innovating and doing cool new things and the one that consistently has done cool new things is Webkit in Safari, I mean they’re adding the CSS3 properties and they’re adding, you know, they’re coming up with properties of their own and adding them and they’re…and they’re doing it, I mean today we have this name spacing, right, where they can say, you know, it’s going to be hyphen webkit hyphen border radius or whatever, so they can keep it out of the, you know, it’s got its own name spaces, kept out of the global area so it doesn’t conflict with anything else, and I would just like to see a lot more of that kind of innovation from browser makers where they’re trying these new things, they’re throwing them in, they’re letting developers play with them, and like I said, it’s kind of a chicken and egg thing I think where the browser makers would like to do this maybe, but they’re afraid of the backlash from the standards community. If they’re adding new properties that aren’t part of a spec, you know, the standards community is…has proven that it’s going to backlash against them and it’s going to say, ‘why did you add this, this isn’t in the spec’, and so then they don’t do things, but the developers and designers also would like to try new things but…so it’s kind of a chicken and egg thing there a little bit I think. So that’s the…that’s the main …the main plan I have on that, and the, you know, like there are examples, like X….sorry, XML HTTP request or Ajax, you know, was a pr
oprietary IE property that they just put in, and eventually got standardised, and that’s kind of the way that I would like to see it go more is where the browser makers are doing new things and then we’re trying to standardise them, which is the opposite I know if, you know, some really respectable people and friends of mine like Jina Bolton and Andy Clarke which see that it should go the other way, which is that specs are written and then browser makers standardise on them, so…

Paul: Yeah…I must admit, listening to you talk kind of fills me with a certain level of dread, to be honest, when you talk about browser manufacturers. You know, I studied…I studied designing websites back in ’95, and you know, and so I lived through this whole period of time where you have browser manufacturers, you know, introducing all kinds of bizarre tags and it was absolute chaos, you know, and you didn’t know what was happening on what browsers. What’s to stop that happening again, beyond the standards community growling in the corner aggressively?

Jeff: Yeah, well I mean that…I mean I was there for that too. I studied also in ’95 and yeah, it was pure chaos. But I think, you know, I mean first of all I think the standards community has made a lot of inroads to where these, you know, I don’t think it would be complete chaos simply because we understand the value of standards now. And there are some…there are some mechanisms in place like the name spacing I’m talking about, where they can do these things and keep them from conflicting with other…so when …when WebKit decides they’re going to add border radius property, they can do it under dash webkit dash border radius, so that if anybody is actually using the real border radius without a, you know, prefix, you know, there’s no conflict, so I think, you know I just feel like there’s some mechanisms in place that would keep it from being so chaotic and the value of standards we’ve learned through the web standards movement, you know, and the browser makers are now on board with the idea of inter-operability, I think would keep it from being so chaotic, but I guess I don’t know for sure. It is…it’s definitely…there’s definitely a balance there because I definitely feel like the browsers have not been doing as many new things as they did back in those days, but those new things did cause problems too, so it’s, you know, but as a Designer I sometimes get bored, I’m like, I’ve played with all that stuff; I’ve played with all the tools we have and I want to try something different, you know, I want something that will…I want advanced grid positioning and, you know, I want to be able to draw shapes and, you know, it’s not out there.

Paul: I mean that is the only trouble I guess with…you know, you were talking about innovation and we need to be innovating more as Designers as well as browser manufacturers. The trouble with innovation to some degree is that you’re always in danger of undermining users’ expectations. I mean this is something you hear someone like Nielsen go on about loads. How…where do you feel the balance is between kind of doing cool new stuff and…you know, not undermining users’ needs or expectations?

Jeff: Well you’ll probably remember from back in the late ‘90s and that sort of thing that there was….and another sort of interest of mine is the sort of demise of the personal website, but back in those days, there was just so many experimental kind of crazy out there personal projects that were happening, and I think that that is a great place to try those things, because they’re not…they’re not real users accessing them; people that are using them are, you know, expecting that, I mean that sort of thing’s a great place to try new things, is on personal projects. Now again, with the culture of compliance that we have, I don’t know how that would fly today. Like if somebody made some crazy experimental site, I think there’s a certain fear of doing that because of backlash again from the web standards community, like you know, it’s a thing where people aren’t seeing the…the meaning, you know, it’s…I’m putting this out there because I’m trying to do something new and difference and …and it’s almost not allowed by the web standards community. Well, you can’t do that, because it doesn’t validate, or you know, whatever. And again, like I said, that’s not always specifically about validation and mark-up. It goes onto the…to that …into usability and into layout and design where people say, don’t change that because it’s messing with users’ expectations, but I think there are places where you can try those things and personal projects to me are the big place where you can try that.

Paul: You’ve got a good point about personal website. It’s like everybody now …have…you know, it’s all about blogs isn’t it, it’s all about….there’s almost this kind of citizen journalism thing where, you know, we’re all actually trying to create a little audience for ourselves and so therefore we don’t want to do anything too dangerous with our…with our personal sites. I remember my….my first personal site was absolutely chaotic, you know, it had no proper navigation whatsoever, but it was fun, it was a place I could experiment, so yeah…

Jeff: Yeah, that’s a real kind of…pet annoyance of mine is that …the loss of that, and I do think, you know, it’s because everything’s a blog, and I love blogs, and you know I have a blog, but I still wish that there was just a little bit more of that crazy experimentation that we had going on back then.

Paul: Mmm. I mean it’s a good point as well. A question I often get asked by people is, you know, how do I promote myself online. They say, I don’t want to…I don’t want to run a blog because I don’t want to write. Well you know, a personal project in a way you’re trying out different things like a sandbox you can play in. It’s a good way of promoting yourself and showing what you’re capable of, and that you do innovate without having to write reams of stuff, because let’s face it, not all of us are big writers, so….yeah

Jeff: Right.

Paul: Good to have your perspective on things. It’s really nice to have a kind of new perspective and you know, a different point of view, so great to have you on the show, and no doubt we will get you back in again in the future. Good to talk to you.

Jeff: Great. Thanks so much for having me.

Thanks to Anna Debenham for transcribing this interview.

Listeners feedback:

Getting a site
off the ground

Shaun writes: Following the headscape redesign and promised boagworld redesign what tips can you give to getting a personal/own site off the drawing board/local machine and actually published.

The problem with internal projects is they lack motivation. They are never as important as client work because they donʼt directly generate income. The answer is to increase their perceived importance. I use a number of techniques:

Document the benefits to your business or personal profile.
Produce a statement of work just as you would an external client.
Price the project so that you can set it against your targets as a marketing cost.
Set a deadline and preferably announce that publicly so you are forced to meet it.
Block out time for the project rather than attempting to “fit it around” client work.

Ultimately it comes down to determination. However, knowing the value of the project and treating it as any other project really helps.

Testing

Erich writes: Thanks so much for the show, all the work you guys put in really shows. It is great learning about aspects of the business that I donʼt get to deal with much.

I was just wondering if you guys had any kind of a testing station at Headscape. We are looking at putting something like that together at my work. Somewhere you can just go sit at and run through all the browsers, maybe even some with different versions of flash and such. Do you guys run anything like that?

Because our designers are based remotely it is not easy to have a central testing suite. We did try that at one stage but it did not work. Connecting remotely wasnʼt as smooth as it should have been and we found multiple designers often wanted access at the same time.

Currently, each designer runs a number of virtual PCs on their individual machines. Most have two versions of XP one running IE7 and one with IE6. We also run multiple version of Firefox and Opera. Most of our designers also own macs allowing them to test Safari. Those that donʼt connect to a mac in the office.

To be honest our testing environment is not the most sophisticated. Most clients do not want to pay for testing against minority browsers and when they do we setup something specific for their needs usefully using a virtual machine. If you are interested in setting up your own Virtual Machines then I recommend VMWare Fusion⁽⁷⁾ for the mac and Virtual PC⁽⁸⁾ under windows.

Headscape is recruiting (again!)

Posted in News on March 26, 2008 by Paul Boag

Headscape are currently after two new members of staff. If you are an experienced Information Architect or a newly qualified developer, we would love to speak to you.

Yes I know, I am not supposed to be blogging at the moment. However, the reason I am not blogging is because we are so insanely busy. In order to get around this problem we are recruiting (yet again!). If you fancy the idea of working with the gang at Headscape then drop me an email.

Here are the jobs…

Information Architect

We are currently looking for a smart, articulate Information
Architect to work with our clients on initial stakeholder interviews,
user testing and the production of wireframes.

We are looking for candidates with some or all of the following skills:

An ability to organize complex information into simple, easy to
understand structures.
Experience in running stakeholder interviews and other requirement
gathering exercises.
Outstanding organizational and communication skills.
Proven experience in preparing, running and reporting on usability
test sessions.
The ability to produce easy to digest documentation on IA and
usability issues.
Extensive experience creating sitemaps, wireframes, use-case
scenarios
and flow diagrams.
Experience of working with large, complex, information heavy
websites.
Ability to plan and execute competitive analysis.
Proven experience of working with and producing personas.
The ability to meet aggressive deadlines.
A good understanding of the design process.
A good understanding of technical constraints.
Experience of copyrighting.
Experience of working with B2C ecommerce sites.

The ideal candidate would be one who is able to work from our Southampton office for at least part of the week.

Experience:

Bachelors degree or the equivalent
3 years experience designing websites preferably within a web design
agency.

Graduate web developer

Starting salary: £22k+
Location: Southampton

Headscape is looking for a graduate web developer, with a 1st or 2:1 degree in a relevant discipline, who is passionate about their profession, keen to learn and can demonstrate good problem solving abilities.

Headscape’s core development technologies are ASP.NET v2.0, VB.NET, Microsoft SQL Server 2005 and XML/XSLT. We have our own, highly flexible content management system software that is the basis for most of our website implementation projects for clients. We are also in the process of developing an online service aimed at web designers.

If you don’t have skills in our core development technologies, don’t worry. We can help you to acquire the skills you’ll need. What we need is demonstrable ability and enthusiasm.

You will need to be a fast learner. You need to be a confident, productive developer. You need to understand relational databases. You must be motivated by developing real-world, web-based applications that really matter to their users. You’ll want to grab with both hands this once-in-a-lifetime opportunity to join a web agency with a national (becoming international) reputation.

If you have had some web development experience outside your degree course we’d love to hear about it too.

Your role will involve working in client project teams with project managers, designers, information architects and user interface developers to create superb bespoke web solutions on-time and within budget.

About Headscape

Headscape is an established web design agency based in the Southampton,
England. We produce top quality websites that are accessible to the
widest possible audience, easy to use and designed around our
clients business objectives. Clients include large government bodies,
educational institutions, charities and the commercial sector.

115. sxsw

Posted in Classic shows on March 19, 2008 by Paul Boag

On show 115: Lessons learnt at SXSW, Garett Dimon on form design and how to find usability test subjects.

Download this show.

Launch our podcast player

News and events | Lessons learnt at SXSW | Garrett Dimon on form design | Listener feedback

News and events

Microsoft launches beta of Internet Explorer 8

The big story over the last couple of weeks has been Microsoft’s release of Internet Explorer 8 as a beta. This has sparked a flurry of posts from various bloggers on the pros and cons of the new release. However the two that caught my attention were Kevin Yank at Sitepoint and Roger Johansson.

In short, IE8 looks like an impressive update with significant improvements in standards support. It would appear we can finally say good by to HasLayout, while at the same time welcoming decent CSS table support. This will open up a lot of possibilities for layout.

There are too many updates to go through here so I would encourage you to check out "what’s new in internet explorer 8" over at the MSDN blog. You might also want to look at the Internet Explorer 8 readiness toolkit that tells you all you need to know about the new browser.

Designers agnst

There seems to be a lot of designer angst flying around the tubes this week including two posts on A List Apart and one at ideas on ideas.

As designers we seem to spend too much time fretting over the creative process, always looking for inspiration and techniques to improve the quality of our work. Andy Rutledge piles on the pressure in a fascinating article about creativity where he redefines the word. A second post on A List Apart twists the knife further by arguing that as designers we need to be superhuman obsessives, willing to work late into the night to produce the truely exceptional.

It maybe the case that to be a truely outstanding designer we need to live in a world of unrealistic personal expectations. However, personally I like the down to earth reality of "Six suggestions that can make you a better designer." In this post Eric writes…

Your project doesn’t have to do everything. It doesn’t have to win awards, make you look good, or have a wry subtext. Getting something simple to work is hard enough. Concentrate on the basics, and see if your idea holds up when shown to the audience.

In my opinion there is too much written about being outstanding and not enough on just being better.

Usability challenges associated with web applications

The final story of the week is a post by Jared Spool. Jared is a truely exceptional usability expert and I can highly recommend his Podcast. He is also an excellent speaker that I had the pleasure to hear again this year at SXSW.

The reason I mention him is because of a post entitled "3 important usability challenges for designing web applications." What I find so refreshing about this post is that it focuses on the web applications we all have on our sites rather than the trendy web 2.0. apps we hear so much about.

Sites like delicious, gmail, of even the up and coming getsignoff (shamless plug!) are somewhat unusal in terms of web apps because the whole site is the app. Most web applications are a part of a greater whole. They are contact databases on corporate intranets or ticket reservation systems on airline sites.

The challenges associated with these types of web apps are different from their trendier cousins and Jared addresses these problems in his post.

It is definately worth reading if you have web applications on your site.

Feature: Lessons learnt SXSW

Marcus shares his impressions of SXSW and the lessons we can all learn.

Interview: Garrett Dimon on form design

Paul: So joining me today is Garrett Dimon. Good to have you on the show. How are you?

Garrett: Pretty good.

Paul: Now I have to say I’m really excited about having you on the show because I have to say I’ve become a bit of a fan. I’m sorry to admit this and I know it’s horribly embarrassing when people say things like this to you. But ever since you’ve released your website which so impressed me I’ve been kinda following your work since then, some of the stuff you’ve been doing. You’re everything I’m not. You’re minimalistic, you’re clean and considered and well thought through while I’m chaotic, over the top and brash. That’s why I’m attracted to your work I think because you’re the
opposite of me.

Garrett: Everything I do from my apartment and everything is just the less I have, the simpler things are, the better things seem to turn out for me.

Paul: If only I could live that way. I’m just not… my brain just doesn’t function in that way. But that’s really cool. So I wanted to get you on the show to talk about forms of all things. It’s something that we’ve touched upon a couple of times in the show but mainly as passing comments in news stories and things like that. In actual fact a couple of the times we have mentioned it, it’s your name that’s come up. It seems to be something that you write a lot about from time to time. You see different articles popping up in different places. Why forms? What is it about forms that seems to attract your attention?

Garret You know it’s hard to give an answer. I really don’t know. But in thinking about it probably my first bet is that I really don’t consider myself to be a designer per say in terms of the more traditional, more artistic design orientated type of visual designer. But with forms it’s more about the interaction design and the more logical aspects of design which are things that definitely work better in my head. So how do you write error messages; how do you label fields; what order do they go in; how should they be grouped; do they go on one page or two pages. Some of the more logical, more interaction issues. Then using what little design knowledge I have to supplement that and make it visually easier to digest the form and see and understand the pieces of it. Basically to me it’s basically the one thing that I feel like I can comfortably design and layout because there’s a lot more to it than just the aesthetics.

Paul: Yeah that kinda makes sense. Why do you think forms are so important in a way? It’s obviously something you consider important but there doesn’t seem to be huge amounts written on the subject. What is it that makes them worth of that kind of attention as far as you’re concerned.

Garrett: I think part of the reason is precisely because they don’t get enough attention. Any real attention you see to forms, I haven’t seen it recently but it’s how do you skin your forms to completely control how they look. Which to me is one of my huge pet peeves. It seems like such a waste of time. To worry about what the forms look like in the browser as opposed to how they actually work, I’m thinking if you’re going to invest the time worrying about how your forms looks it’s probably better to spend that time worrying about how they are going to work. Are you using the right form field for that job and some of the more critical things about forms. Really forms, especially now with web apps being what they are, forms are such a huge part of your everyday interacts. Things like efficiency, learnability, accuracy, all the vasts of usability that matter. It’s not just a matter of “Is this form efficient?”. Well it’s easy to make an efficient form but it’s not necessiarly going to be something that somebody else could learn and use or you might be able to learn it but will you remember how to use it next time you come back. Balancing all the different kind of vasts of usability that Nielsen identifies and really working them out so that you don’t dumb the form down so that it’s so simple that anyone can use it that it’s just a cumbersome process to fill out. Really kind of massaging it with all those things in mind.

Paul: You’re right when you say that in the world of web applications certainly forms are amazingly important but they pretty much appear on every site. It’s hard to thing of a site where they don’t appear.

Garrett: Well you think about a magazine site or anything like that where it’s more content orientated, it’s definitely a lower priority.

Paul: Yeah but you’ve still got contact us forms and things like that.

Garrett: Yeah, comment forms and…

Paul: Ok. So you touch there on the fact that one of your pet peeves was the fact that people worry about the design of their forms rather than how usable they are. What over common mistakes are you seeing from people about how they design and implement forms?

Garrett: I think there’s a whole slew of them and I think a lot of it is just worrying about the wrong things or not giving thought to things that matter. My main reason with the designing the form fields is that people are used to seeing form fields and what they look like in their browser, in their native rendering. Sure as a designer having pixel perfect control would be nice but I would hope that most of us who are now designing on the web would have forgone that state of mind where we have to have complete control over everything, it has to look exactly the way we want. A lot of time not only is it a waste of time but it actually hinders usability when those form fields don’t look like what someone expects a form field to look like or button for that matter. When the design becomes design for design’s sake it actually hinders usability in addition to just wasting time. When I initially started developing things it was all about consistency because consistency is easier to implement. If every form field looks the same, behaved the same, is the same size etc. it’s easier to implement because you use the same CSS and you don’t have to put as much thought into it. So while consistency is valuable there’s definitely an aspect of context that a lot of people don’t necessarily pay attention to. In some situations, I think 37 Signals have done a good job on this, they’ll make some fields larger than others relative to the size. In particular in Backpack, their headings aren’t just a form field they are actually bolder and look a little more like a header. They are a little larger font than the body of the note. It adds a little bit of context so that it’s more intuitive as to what the purpose of that field is. There’s a lot of different ways to do it. That’s just one of the more tangible ones. Basically the mistake being focusing too blindly on making everything consistent when there are appropriate situations to break the rules and use context to make some changes. Another one is just dumping a whole form onto the page without breaking it up into logical sections or groups. A lot of times people are afraid of making a form any longer visually because of scrolling. While you don’t want somebody to scroll 80 screenfuls, scrolling one versus eight screens is neligable.

Paul: So you wouldn’t suggest splitting forms across multiple pages then?

Garrett: Well there’s definitely context for that if it’s appropriate. Amazon is a great example there because you’ve got your payment screen and your address screen. It actually can be a fairly complex process but the time you’ve selected several addresses or updated an address, updated a payment method, changed the items in your cart. As you’re jumping around the different screen’s you definitely wouldn’t want all that interaction to try and be contained on one screen. It depends on the size of the form and the context of the form and how interactive it can be, how many potential branches off of that path are there to take. Another would be poor labelling. A lot of the time people label things. This goes back to just naming conventions in general. Just basic information architecture stuff. Whether it follows a corporate naming convention that may not be the right word for somebody that’s not inside the company wall or just simply flat out the wrong word for international [???]. Really anything. Just not putting enough thought into the label. The first thing that pops into your head isn’t always the right thing. Using the wrong kind of inputs so a lot of times whilst… and I have no idea in the world why people would do this… People who for instance who use checkboxes when they won’t use radio buttons and instead they write Javascript to control the radio button. Checkboxes as if they were radio buttons. Thinks like that where I just have no idea what these people were thinking in some of these situations. Just a lot of things like using a radio button or having a yes/no radio button where a checkbox could work. Multiple select lists which are an absolutely terrible interface element to use because a lot of people don’t know you can control+click. If there are small lines and you accidentally slip off that control key and click on a new one, it’ll select that new one and erase all your other selections in that list. There’s different things that kinda get abused and misused in situations where they really aren’t necessiary. A much simpler solution usually exists.

Paul: Yeah. I’ve seen the radio button, checkbox problem and it’s always very amusing.

Garrett: And vice-versa. Where it’s radio buttons and they try and make them checkboxes just because they think it looks prettier sometimes.

Paul: How bizarre.

Garrett: Which I guess is another great example – over using Javascript in forms. It’s one of those things. I don’t know where I heard it but the best description I ever heard of Javascript, Ajax or any of that stuff is that it’s really a spice. If you’re cooking you wouldn’t just dump a whole bottle into your pot. Or you wouldn’t start with a bottle of curry and dump it into a pot and say “OK, now what are we going to make?” You would decide what you are going to make and then think “You know this could really use a bit of curry here”. A lot of people just don’t use Javascript as a spice. It really starts to define the experience and in a lot of situations actually makes it worse or more confusing.

Paul: I presume you would encourage some use of Javascript for example. Things like doing some client side validation as long as it falls back on a server side validation. That kind of thing.

Garrett: Yeah absolutely.

Paul: OK so let’s turn that question around. We’ve been talking very much about the mistakes that people make, but what advice would you provide people about approaching forms? What are the things that they should be doing rather than shouldn’t be doing? I know that in some ways this is going to overlap but is there a particular approach that you take?

Garrett: One of the biggest things I guess is when ever; doing consulting for custom applications or things like that a lot of times we don’t realize that a lot of the complexity from forms comes from the complexity of the business. Whether it’s somebody doing markup or somebody designing a form, a lot of times you know if a business analyst or whoever creates these form requirements and says “here you go design this form.” It has 100 fields and this is out contact form and 80 of the fields are required. A lot of times people just say “okay, it’s my job to implement this. In my experience a lot of business analysts aren’t really familiar with principles of the web and what makes sense. A lot of times the real effort to creating a good form is in educating everybody else about what would be involved. Pushing back in situations like that. Not in a bad way but in a very professional productive way. “You realize that this is going to be a really bad contact form. Nobody’s acutually going to use it. I’ve even heard response like “That’s the point. If people contact us we have to take time a respond to them.” The problem isn’t with the form there, its with underlying things. Obviously that’s a little bit of an exaggeration. The idea is that the best place to start with forms and any kind of interaction like that is with the principles that are underneath there kind of guiding it. With the issue tracker that I am developing, I started out parring back the process of what’s the lifecycle of an issue. Trimming out parts that I didn’t think would really be necessary. I was just looking at it in the context of the lifecycle. I hadn’t even thought about what are the forms going to look like? How am I going to communicate this lifecycle within the context of the application? When it came down to the point when I had to explain how that actually worked, because I had trimmed the proccess and the lifecycle down so much, and it was only 3 steps really, I was able to translate that concept directly into the interface. If I had never actually gone and trimmed the lifecycle down and it had 6 different states that were very cross dependant and this state only is an option when you are in this state… It gets so complicated that even if I could express it in an interface, the code to build it would have been so absolutely unweildly that I could have never created a natural and intuitive inteface. So, I guess really challenging the underlying things rather than just thinking about the things on the surface. And then really just look at every form on it’s own. In it’s own light. What is the goal of this form? Should it be laid out like a traditional form? With one set of “label” “field” all the way down the page and a submit button. Should there be other buttons? Another thing when, I have a fairly consistent model that I am using when I am designing forms in my new application. The main form is for submitting issues and that one form is probably going to get 80% of the useage in this whole system. That and commenting. In the context of submitting issue alot of times you will be in a meeting capturing things as people are talking, capturing issues cause it’s an issue tracker. You want to be able to capture and issue, save it, and move on and capture another one really in kind of rapid succession. So I added an extra button at the bottom that I wouldn’t put on any other page, cause it doesn’t make sense, to save and add another. So it immediately saves that one and takes you back to the data entry screen. You can just continue in a circle and just keep on adding and adding. So really looking at forms and thinking about how are people going to be interacting with this? What are they doing in the real world while they’re using this form? Are they copying data from another application into here? Are they in the middle of a meeting just capturing items in rapid succession. What are they doing? Are they just quickly jotting it down from their iPhone? Understanding that context helps illustrate ideas and different sublte variations that you can do to forms and make them very very practical without adding a whole bunch of extra overhead on the implementation.

Paul: I remember you wrote an article at one stage redesigning eBay registration form. When you wrote about that you talked about the fact that this is a registration form. It is a one off form, and all of the ways that that then informed the way that you built the form. How it affected the positioning of things, and the layout and things, simply because it wasn’t going to be a form that people were using again and again. That’s the same kind of context that you are talking about.

Garrett: Yeah exactly. There’s always a different context to a form and it matters. It is easy to overlook it but that context, and really any design for that matter, context is so important but it is something that…I think that main reason that people don’t pay as much attention to context is because it requires a lot of extra work. A lot of times it’s easier, and it makes sense for kind of a first pass, to make every form look the same. It takes a lot more work to go through and re-invent the wheel every time you look at a form even though, re-inventing the wheel is probably a little bit extreme, to really give it some custom attention. Some tender loving care, just takes a lot more effort that lot of projects don’t have time for.

Paul: You mentioned earlier 37signals that you liked some of the stuff that they were doing. Are there any other good examples out there of forms that you really think are getting it right and are worth us having a look at?

Garrett: Probably the one thing that always jumps to my mind any time anybody asks me about forms is all of the work that Luke W is doing. I hate trying to butcher his name. The stuff that he is doing and hopefully his upcoming book is just really incredible. In depth. He’s done a lot of eye tracking research about label placement and button placement and he’s talked extensively about primary and secondary action buttons. All of his stuff is really incredible.

Paul: So where can people find out about him?

Garrett: I always just google for Luke W to get to his site. Functioning form is his blog. He’s the first hit for Luke W.

Paul: I’ll add it to the show notes. People can get to it via that. That’s interesting. I must admit I hadn’t hear of him so I’ll definitely check that out.

Garrett: He’s one of the, I don’t know his exact title, but he works at Yahoo and he’s got a plethora of presentations about form design and all of the kind of stuff. Really sharp guy.

Paul: And he’s writing a book you say as well?

Garrett: Yes he is for Rosenfeld Media. It’s due out early 2008.

Paul: Excellent. So just to finish us off. A little bit of bile at the end of the interview. Is there any forms that you want to name and shame? Any site that do things really badly that we can all go and laugh at and sneer at?

Garrett: You know that’s a very tough thing to do.

Paul: (lauging) So many out there.

Garrett: Well there are so many out there. But at the same time too there are a lot that seem like they could use improvement but they’re companies that are investing a lot of money and research to improving their forms. So I’m hesitant as an outsider, somebody who isn’t exposed to some of that data, to try and call them out, when they’re probably acutually right on the money. The top two that come to mind that I know are successful are eBay and Amazon. I think Amazon succeeds on the interaction design of their buttons and the flow of their checkout is natural and intuitive but I feel like a lot of their page designs, and it could be a very intentional thing in order to, although I hate thinking that Amazon would acutually do that, to kind of trap people and confuse them almost. If you look at each page in and of itself I think there is a lot of design things that they could make adjustments to that would make the pages easier to understand and comprehend at a glance. I feel like right now their design of their checkout process, or most of their site in general, is very busy and intense. It’s difficult to focus on one element because there’s so many elements. There is very little very intuitive page hierarchy within each page. And they’ve made leaps and bounds, watching the site evolve over the years. But, it still feels like there’s a lot more room for some design consistency for them to introduce. They’re slowly getting there. eBay is another one who, I know they acutually, I forget their CEO’s name, but she declared 2008 the year of user experience at eBay. They’ve acutually invested a lot in trying to improve their forms and really their user experience period. eBay is one that I’ve only successfully purchased something on there once and everytime I try to swim through there I get lost and just give up. Too me any situation like that is just begging for help. I think any form, even the best of the best, even 37signals, everybody is still learning. This is all so new that even the best forms have so much room for improvement. Even my stuff, I come a month later and say “what was I thinking there?” There’s so much work that needs to be done. I think that Luke’s work that he’s doing is probably some of the best and most important work that we’ll see in forms in the near future. He’s starting to really put down facts about what really is good and bad and why it is good and bad. Up until now most of us have just been pontificating based on “well this form is hard to fill out because of errors.” Or you know, the form breaks, or the error message isn’t helpful. Very obvious things. He’s tracking the much more subconcious things that until now nobody’s really dug into and made claims about. It’s kind of a cop out on your question.

Paul: No No. You gave two example there and you gave constructive reasons why they should be improved or could be improved. No I don’t thinks it’s a cop out. You’re just so much nicer than I am. You didn’t go for the jugular that was the only thing. Garrett it’s been great to have you on the show. I think that you’ve given us some real good hints to get going I guess and make some imrovements. It was good to talk to you.

Garrett: Yeah likewise.

Paul: No doubt we’ll get to talk again soon before too long. Especially when you’re issue tracker comes out. We’ll have to get you on hear all about that.

Garrett: Yeah. I’m hoping it will be sooner rather than later but it’s definitely tough to balance the feelancing and paying the bills and making progress on it.

Paul: I know exactly how you feel, we’re doing the same thing at Headscape at the moment. It’s always difficult. Client work is so tempting because it pays the bills here and now.

Garrett: Yup, exactly.

Paul: Okay good to talk to you and we’ll talk again sooon.

Garrett: Sounds good.

Thanks to Lee Theobald for doing the transcription

Listeners feedback:

Finding usability test subjects

Our audio question comes from Clare who asks…

"Where do you find your test subjects for more formal user testing"

It can be hard to find good test subjects and I am not aware of any agencies out there that source people for you (although I am sure somebody will correct me).

I think it is worth stressing that finding users who match the demographic of your target audience is not a huge concern. As Steve Krug points out in his book "Don’t make me think" most problems are encountered by any user. That said, where possible it is good to find people that roughly match the specification.

To be honest our approach it is very adhoc. It normally consists of both Headscape and the client scrambling around to see who you can find. The client often has "tame" customers they can ask and we fallback on family, friends and other clients for recommendations.

I should also say my local church has been very handy! A church seems to have a good cross section of ages and backgrounds and an advert in the church newsletter often does the trick. Equally advertising in your local newspaper can attract people, but you have to be willing to pay for their time.

Accessible tables

This week’s email is from Daniel and takes the form of a recommendation rather than a question…

"Could you cover the tips discussed in this article [about accessible tables]? I have seen a lot of tables on the web. Almost none of them uses any of these tips."

The article Daniel is refering to can be found on the Opera developers site, which is a great resource covering all aspects of web development (not just stuff relating specifically to Opera). The specific post looks at how to markup data tables in an accessible format. Since designers have stopped using tables for layout they have become largely ignored. However, if not marked up correctly they can prove a real problem for speech readers. A simple table such as this…

Day	AM	PM
Monday	Meeting	Travelling
Tuesday	Free time	Meeting

…can become impossible to understand when read back because it is read in a linear fashion…

Day, AM, PM, Monday, Meeting, Travelling, Tuesday, Free time, Meeting

However, if marked up correctly it suddenly makes sense…

Day Monday AM Meeting
Day Monday PM Travelling
Day Tuesday AM Free time
Day Tuesday PM Meeting

Great find Daniel. These are tips we should all be implementing.

114. Forum

Posted in Classic shows on March 4, 2008 by Paul Boag

On show 114: Should designers stick to designing? What goes into a usability test script, and we talk to Alex Mogilevsky from Microsoft about Internet Explorer 8.

Podcast: Download (32.8MB)

Download this show.

Launch our podcast player

News and events | User testing scripts | Alex Mogilevsky from Microsoft | Listener emails

News and events

Before we look at the news I want to share a bit about boagworld. There is so much happening with both Boagworld and Headscape. If you are interested read my random news post.

However, for now I just want to mention the forum. For a while now the forum has been experiencing technical difficulties. Fortunately that is behind us and I want to encourage you all to check it out.

I can honestly say that the boagworld forum is the best forum I have ever been involved in. Not because of anything I have done, but because of the awesome people on there. They are so amazingly helpful and I have never seen a flame war or newbie bashing.

Please take a few minutes to sign up. Even if you don’t regularly participate, you can at least add your location to our listeners map :)

Instant mobile sites

I want to mention a website called MoFuse.

I have talked before about the importance of the mobile web. With a new generation of internet enabled phones we need to “moblise” our sites quickly.

MoFuse makes the process painless. It takes your RSS feed and tailors it for different mobile devices. For example an iPhone user would receive a different experience to a WAP user.

As well as RSS you can add static pages and customise the design. It is an impressive service and the basic setup is free.

I should stress that this is not an ideal solution. It does not replace a carefully crafted mobile site. However, it is a good starting point, especially if all you want is a mobile version of your personal blog.

And yes, I did create a mobile version of boagworld (m.boagworld.com) that allows you to stream the podcast on your iPhone.

Layout, do’s and don’ts

My next news item is a post by Andy Rutledge on bad layout conventions. He highlights two problems.

The first is three column layouts where the main content is framed by two side columns. Andy argues this creates several problems and demonstrates how things could be improved by taking the Apple store (which uses this layout) and redesigning it so that the two side columns are to the right of the main content.

The second problem is organising different sections of information into long vertical columns of varying lengths. This requires a lot of scanning and scrolling. Again, Andy demonstrates the problem by fixing it on an example site. He uses a horizontal approach where the sections span the width of the page rather than being sorted vertically.

At the same time Andy posted this article, the guys at Web Designers Wall posted some inspirational grid based designs. Interestingly I saw the Web Designers Wall post first and was inspired by the list of sites. However, after reading Andy’s post I returned and noticed the problems Andy has identified. Suddenly my opinion was changed.

I recommend checking out both posts. They will change the way you view layout.

jQuery for designers

At the beginning of the year I said designers should learn Javascript. I have also said in the past that we should avoid frameworks and learn Javascript from scratch. However, Christian Heilmann challenged this assumption in our recent interview.

This week I found a tutorial aimed at introducing jQuery to designers. What I read blew me away. Not only is jQuery small (approximately 29kb) it also reduces the amount of code I need to write considerably. It will quickly earn back those extra bytes.

However, what I love most is that it reads like CSS. To find elements by tag, class or id you don’t use getElementBy as you would in Javascript. Instead you specify it in the same way as CSS using # . and tag names.

Finally, it makes animation easy. You can slide things around, change their opacity and much more. Check out the extensive documentation to learn more.

Although I haven’t used it on a project yet, it is looking hopefully.

Feature: User testing scripts

I have talked before about the benefits of user testing. I have discussed how to user test on a budget. Now, I want to look at some basics that go into every usability test script.

Expert interview: Alex Mogilevsky

Before we get to the interview with Alex it is worth saying that he contacted me a few days after this interview saying that it could be out of date by the time of broadcast. He was of course correct as last night Microsoft announced that IE8 will be standards compliant by default. Although I still do not have a problem with Microsoft’s previous position, I know a number of people disagree with me. It is encouraging to see Microsoft listen to the community and change its approach accordingly. I am sure they will have to endure criticism from other quarters for this decision and we need to encourage them.

Paul:Okay, joining me today is Alex from Microsoft. Now Alex have you noticed how I avoided trying to say your surname there? How do you pronounce it? Ah well I haven’t got a hope have I? I’m doomed. But it’s good to have you on the show anyway. Now it’s really nice of you to come on. We thought it’d be good to get you on the show to talk a little about IE because I understand that that’s what you’re currently involved with. But before we get on to that can you give the listeners a bit of a background as to who you are and what you do and kind of how you ended up being involved with IE

Alex: Uh yeah I’m at Microsoft for about 15 years now and I worked on all kinds of projects from word to publisher and IE now. I first worked on it at the end of A5 so it is my, technically it is my fifth version of IE although the real big one that I worked on was IE 5.5.

Paul:Oh okay.

Alex: I have a reason to not like .5 version (of IE) because that was really a big project for me and I have to explain that it was 5.5.

Paul:(Pauls laughs.) Yeah it may be a .5 version number but it was massive to you. I get the idea. Well obviously um part of the reason that we got you on the show today is to talk about version targeting. But we also want to talk about a lot of different things as well. How you see the browser developing in the future? What the futures of browesers generally is? But let’s kick off with the subject of version targeting. Did you expect the kind of level of reaction that you got off of the back of this?

Alex:It was surpising to see huge negative reaction from people being published. I don’t know there were probably hundreds and hundreds of comments on IE blog. It’s hard to find the positive one. When you talk to somebody who is actually creating content for the web I get a little time to explain the concept is, everybody agrees that well there is some content there, there has to be a way to figure out what the author was thinking when they were creating it. So you should be kind of marking that content with some clue for the browser to render it properly. It is quite amazing to me that people who disagree with version point fingers at Microsoft. That it is totally Microsoft’s thing.

Paul:I mean it’s interesting isn’t it, cause one of the reasons that people said that Microsoft introduced versioning was because there was such a kind of kick back over IE 7 breaking the web, as it has been put. Um Would you think that IE 7 has been perceived as a failure within Microsoft? Many people seem to have thought of it, you know, there is this perception that is the way it is perceived in Microsoft. Is that actually the case?

Alex: Well. It depends on how you define failure. I think from one point of view it didn’t do enough from another it did too much. So go with what everybody ask us. We go and do more standard, and we didn’t get standard enough. It’s not 100% of standard but the little that we did broke so much that we really learned the hard way that we can’t make any progress without doing something about not breaking exsisting web.

Paul:Do you think that with the kind of issue, you know, one of the main comment that I’ve read about the version targeting is the fact that by default um, that you have to kind of opt into version targeting in effect to opt out of it. That by default it will render as IE 7 for time and memorial. Do you think that that’s likely to change before the release of IE 8 or is Microsoft fairly set on that now?

Alex: I don’t think we have any other option. What would that option be, is go and visit every website on the web and opt it out and then carefully figure out which ones are actually designed to work with IE 8 even though they couldn’t have possibly known what it means.

Paul: So do you think that it would be too much of a burden on people out there creating websites, that when they’re seeing a problem and they’re saying why does IE 8, you know, break my website. Telling them to just add another single line of code, you know, do you think that’s asking too much?

Alex: Well I think any assumption like assumes that every site out there actually has a person who understands why it is what it is and is actually capable of fixing them. The vast majority of people publish and they don’t know what a version is. They don’t know if their site is in Quirks mode or standards mode. They look at this as a browser bug. But, maybe there is something that is relying on a bug in previous browsers where old browsers were compatable in being non-standards.

Paul:I’m in agreement. I think you’ve come up, I mean it is a compromise what you guys have come up with, but as compromises go I think it is a very good one. I think it’s much more important to keep the web an environment that anybody can put information up on without having to be an expert in web design. If that means as professional web designers we’re slightly inconvenienced that seems to be a price worth paying from my point of view. But let’s move on from version targeting cause we’ve talked about it far too much on the show. Let’s talk a little bit about the process of developing a web browser. I think for a lot of web designers we’re entirely on the side of, obviously, you know putting things into a web browser. Getting things to render correctly. How do you go about creating a web browser? What’s involved? What should we be aware of?

Alex:Well a web browser is an enormously complicated thing. There is a reason that new browsers don’t show up too much. You have to build at the same time a decent editor, a rendering system that can render almost any kind of text and graphic. It has to be fast. It has to have object model. It has to parse a variety of different things. And is has to be compliant with a standard which is a book of at least 2 or 3 inches thick if you count HTML, CSS, and object model.

Paul:You say that developing a browsers is hugely complex and obviously it is, and that’s part of the reason that browsers don’t come around very often, or updates to browsers. But, on the other hand we do seem to see other browser manufacturers moving much quicker than Microsoft. Why is that? Why does there seem to be slower movement out of Microsoft than elsewhere.

Alex:I’m not sure that much quicker is the right way to describe it. The reason a lot of browsers are way ahead of Microsoft in a particular standard support is I think for two reasons. First we actually care about standards and we are nice people.

Paul:(laughing) You’re implying that no one else is nice and no one else cares about standards. I’m sure that’s not true.

Alex:No not really. This is how this happened. When we started working on browsers, which was, IE 1, 2, 3, 4 in the 90′s, there wasn’t so much of a standard. There was some idea you can mark text with tags in angle brackets and it will render somehow. So a b means bold. Eventually some kind of defacto standards developed. Every site was built for Netscape and it was important to be like Netscape. It was pretty much a standard. So when we built a browser at that time we were trying to be as compatable with that standard as possible. Then what happened, Netscape just went away for a few years and we were left alone. There was nobody to compete with. That is a hard place to be. You have to be compatable with the web. You can’t break anything. How do you make progress at that time. There was no versioning. At that point we decided to be nice and return the favour to other browsers and we went away for 5 years and were sitting for 5 years on the beach and letting everybody else catch up.

Paul:That was really generous of you. That was a wonderful thing. That’s a good answer I like that Alex.

Alex:Now everybody’s caught up we can be in the game together.

Paul:Okay. So now that everybody’s at the same level you’re going to go for it majorly. So that brings us quite nicely on to the future of browsers. You know, particularly IE 8. Obviously you can’t really tell us anything that isn’t already publicly known and I wouldn’t expect you to. But, not everybody that listens to this podcast already knows all that is publicly out there about IE 8. So tell us what kind of direction you’re going in. How are you going to compete with these other browsers out there now that they’ve caught you up?

Alex:Well the biggest thing to know about IE 8 is it is back. We have a real team of people who is really serious about building a good browser. The biggest investment in this one is obviously standards. That’s the biggest thing that everybody was unhappy about with the previous versions. We get as much as we can of good standards support right here. We are making major investments in CSS 2.1 doing whatever it means to be compatable. Interestingly enough it has to be defined what it means to be compatable, to say that you are compatable. We are doing as much as we can in this area. There will be a lot of exciting user interface features there. But I don’t think I can tell about that because I am really a core technology person and I learn about our UI implements from demos.

Paul:Fair enough. So, internally are you working towards a deadline of any description over this? I presume we’re not talking about another 5 years here? We’re talking about a much shorter period of time.

Alex:Definitely it is way closer than 5 years.

Paul:(laughs) That’s good. You want to narrow it down any from that or am I pushing my luck?

Alex:Yeah I don’t think I can have a number. Unless it is publicly known and I haven’t checked in the last couple of days. But you are going to see it pretty soon. I am going to set your expectations pretty low. Don’t expect this to be done in quaters because what we are doing with new standards layout it isn’t crazy and insane trying to rewrite things like this in less than 10 years.

Paul: So you’re suggesting that before too long we might see a beta. You’ve obviously come under a bit of an attack from Opera and they’re have been several comments about that. And then you’ve come out and said that you’ve done that acid test. How big a deal really is that in the real world? Do you think it is a fair test of a browser?

Alex:Well it is an acid test. As I understand in chemistry it checks the presence of a chemical, right? I guess it is a variant like that. I spent days taking this apart and figuring out what every line means and what features do you have to have, and how are they supposed to work to render a particular pixel in a particular place. It is quite and interesting test in the way that it tests very few features but it test the features in corner cases of intersting features of a standard. So you would assume if you get that far, if you manage to render text at all and you render Acid 2 you are in really good shape.

Paul:So is is fair to say…The danger is, and I have heard some people say this, with IE 8 you’ve just been going after being able to say yeah we pass the Acid 2 test. You could kind of develop those things in isolation. My hope, and I suspect your hope as well, is that you’re going to go beyond that. It’s almost inconsequential that you passed the Acid 2 test. It’s part of a broader aim to introduce better standards support. Is that a fair comment?

Alex:Yes it is. It probably would be not unreasonable to have another browser that doesn’t have an particularly promise but passes the Acid 2 test. We are really trying to be as close to standard as possible.

Paul:Let’s broaden it out cause we’ve kind of picked on IE quite a lot here. Let’s broaden it out to talk about where browsers are going generally in the next few years. I mean, what do you think we’re going to see happening in browsers generally?

Alex:Well from my point of view as standards and layout, I see actually multiple browsers being 100% compatable with CSS 2.1 which most helps both browsers and standards to really get into the new steps. We’ve heard a lot of criticism on standards not moving. Like CSS 3 some people are saying that trying to make sense of all the different parts of CSS 3 what is the next step there. In my opinion I am as unhappy with CSS 3 not moving as designers are. For this to move you have to have a solid ground of the previous version not only being a solid standard but also being supported properly. Then addding every little feature to CSS 3 become important because now we can have several implementations of that. As far as standards go I am really looking forward to the world after IE 8. And there are all the different directions of being mobile. Bringing more of the technologies into the browsers that they can perhaps take a bite out of flash or out of .pdf. Where you can have real content that was unthinkable for a browser a few years ago. Into every place that has a good browser. So I’m really optimistic. One thing to understand about developing a new browser is it’s exciting who writes is how has it. But for a web designer it is like making wine. Something happens today that will actually make the difference in the life of a web designer 10 or 15 years from now. Whatever is being shipped today, everybody you care about now has this one.

Paul:What we need you guys to do is drop support for IE 6 really quick cause then we can use it as an excuse to drop support as well.

Alex:This goes back to versioning a little bit. There is 3 kinds of versioning. There is versioning of a standard, version of a browser and version of a document. The version of a document is something that we are not going to drop ever. If something is written for IE 6 today 100 years from now we will still want to render it this way right? We wouldn’t go to the library and throw away all the books that are older than 100 years.

Paul:That’s a very good point.

Alex: In this sense many pages today are in Quirks mode. Google is in Quirks mode. If you try to render it in 100% standard it will look a little different. It will look quite odd by the way.

Paul:That’s a whole other discussion. Google and it’s standards support. What about typography? Are we going to see some improvements on that front? I mean we’ve noticed some of the other browsers starting to support web fonts and things like that. Can we expect a similar thing from IE?

Alex:IE supports font embedding for several versions now. There was an extremly complicated discussion within the standards group on how do you create a standard for downloadable fonts that can be standardized but is also friendly to font manufacturers. To people who own fonts. It’s easy to implement a hyperlink to a font that will be downloaded and used. Then it encourages to just put fonts out there, which you’re not supposed to do.

Paul:Obviously this isn’t down to Microsoft cause this is the whole standards group discussing this. That strike me as no different than what we do with imagery at the moment. Images can be pirated and that’s somebody’s intellectual property. It’s kind of just the way things have been. Do you feel that their is a kind of tightening up on things like that. Like people are more concerned about that then perhaps they were in the early days?

Alex:It is a good comparison of the difference of, whats the difference of an image or a song or a movie or a font. It is just so much more expensive to build a font. It is so easy to share if you just put out a file that if we make it easier to share we will just business model for a lot of small design companies who just build fonts. So we have to be very careful on how exactly it is being done. I think we are fairly close to be able to come up with a workable standard. We’re just not there yet.

Paul:Okay. So that is something that will probably turn up at some point but not necessarily in IE 8.

Alex:Well if that standard is embedded OpenType it is already there.

Paul:Yeah that’s true. Let’s just touch on briefly another kind of criticism that really hasn’t been aimed at the IE group but Microsoft as a whole, which is this whole issue of Office. The latest version of Office. I know a lot of people who are passionate about HTML emails who were deeply disturbed to see that the latest versio of Outlook doesn’t use IE’s rendering engine. Can you give us any kind of insight into what happened there? I mean obviously it’s not your area but it does affect you guys to some degree.

Alex:I wasn’t part of this decision but I can very well understand how that happened. When Office 2007 was being planned IE team pretty much didn’t exsist. We completely rebuilt the team for IE 7. I am not joking that we were 5 years on the beach. IE team stopped exsisting after IE 6. People went off doing their own different things. Of people working on IE 7 and now IE 8 there is litterally a handful of people who worked on IE 5. Maybe even less. It is a brand new team. When Office 2007 was being planned in 2003 there wasn’t anybody to talk to. The biggest concern about HTML email is security. So even is somebody wanted to build in IE 8 currently in a product to read email it would put a major requirement on IE to be able to be able to open all of these emails securly. If you take browser security and application security for things like Outlook it is a multiplier. It is way harder to build it that way. So I think that is totally sucks that you can’t send HTML email but I think that they decision that they had to make in Office 2007 was really difficult.

Paul:Interesting stuff. It’s been great. I’ve really enjoyed chatting with you Alex. I feel like I’ve got a little bit more of an understanding of what’s gone on inside of Microsoft and where things have gone. It sounds like a big part of all of this was your own success. That because other browser manufacturers disappeared and you were kind of left alone there wasn’t the kind of investment internally within Microsoft to keep things moving forward and it’s had ramifications. It’s very interesting.

Alex:Yeah. Thanks for talking to me. I have to say that you have a great podcast. I’ve been learning a lot from you. You don’t even imagine how much you yourself have on the future of internet. Just putting together this show.

Paul:(I can just see Paul’s head growing) Oh well thank very much Alex. I’m sure I’m not that important really but I’ll pretend I am. Thanks very much for coming on the show. We’ll get you back in the future. Perhaps once IE 8 is out in beta. You can talk a little bit more then. That would be fun.

Alex:I would love to. Thank you.

Listeners email:

Implementing RSS

Our first question is an audio question about RSS. It asks what tools exist for adding RSS to a clients website.

The simplest solution is to use a blog. Whether you use Movable Type, Word Press or Blogger they will all generate an RSS feed. Blogs are also easy to update and can be customised to integrate with the rest of your site.

However, a blog might not meet your clients requirements. For example, they might wish the RSS feed to link to a non-blog page or even a third party site. One option is to use a social bookmarking tool like Delicious. This creates an RSS feed of all links added. Alternatively you could use a desktop application such as FeedForAll. FeedForAll is a cross platform application that allows users to easily create, edit and publish RSS feeds. It also comes with a PHP script that converts RSS into HTML via PHP. This is ideal for embedding RSS into your website.

Hope that helps.

Should designers just design

Our next question comes from Travis…

I have recently been asked to join a web development/design team as their full-time UI designer. My responsibilities would include the UI design only and not css, html ajax, etc. I know the basics of css and html and have designed standards-based sites from scratch, and am eager to learn more code to further my skill set. I have been discouraged from learning code while in this new position, and focus on the UI design. Do most web design firms share this same structure?

Excellent question Travis and one that causes much lively discussion. Infact Cameron Moll asked the same question and the last I saw there was 114 comments!

My answer is that designers should be able to code. Personally, I don’t believe you can be an effective interface designers without an understanding of the underlying code and the constraints of HTML and CSS. I respect those who say that design shouldn’t be constrained by technology. However, in the real world its more complicated.

Setting that debate aside I would suggest that not knowing code is going to damage your career. Personally I would not hire somebody who cannot build as well as design a site. Consider your next job and whether you can afford to stay somewhere that actively discourages you from expanding your knowledge of the web.

To leave an audio comment for the show skype “boagworldshow” or call +44 20 8133 5122.

113. Hiring

Posted in Classic shows on February 27, 2008 by Paul Boag

On show 113: Christian Heilmann on common Javascript mistakes. Marcus talks about hiring new staff and Paul shares his journey into screencasting.

Podcast: Download (29.9MB)

Download this show.

Launch our podcast player

News and events | Hiring new staff | Christian Heilmann on common Javascript mistakes | Listener emails

A quick request. We are really in need of some more transcribers to help with the interviews we do every week. The team we have are doing an amazing job but it would be great to spread the load.

If you feel you could help once in a while please drop me an email and I will add you to the list.

News and events

Highly extensible CSS

A while back Cameron Moll released a tantalising screencast of a seminar he was running on Highly extensible CSS. Website today need to be ultra-flexible, dealing with changing content, multiple devices, and user customisation. Cameron’s presentation aimed to teach designers and developers how to build interfaces capable of adapting to the unforeseen.

Unfortunately, I didn’t get the opportunity to attend. I was therefore excited to discover that Cameron is about to cover the same subject in a series of four posts on his website, all for free!

So far he has only posted the introduction. However I am really looking forward to the whole series. For now just check out the screencast and see if it excites you as much as it did me…

Video tools

Talking of screen casts I have actually been working on several myself at the moment. We are in the process of redeveloping the Headscape website and have decided to include a couple of demonstrations and presentations.

This means I have been in research mode and I thought I would share what I have found. Firstly, I have discovered a great screencasting tool called Screen Flow. This Leopard only software stands head and shoulders above anything else I have tried on either Windows or the Mac. It is amazingly easy to record and edit your screencast and has some great built in effects. My favourite feature is that it will capture from both a web cam and the screen at the same time. This allows you to cut between video and the screen or even overlay a video feed on top of the cast.

Once I had recorded my video I started to look for somewhere to host it. Although I would be foolish not to put it on Youtube where it will get the most exposure, I didn’t want to use Youtube when embedding on my site. The quality on YouTube is poor and you are limited over length and size. With this in mind I looked at a number of competitors. The winner for me turned out to be Vimeo. The quality is superb, they are much more flexible over length and time, but most of all they provide links to the original file and allow you to customise the interface.

So, if you are looking to create a screencast I highly recommend Screen Flow and Vimeo. Also, if you are looking for tips on how to make an engaging video then check out Ryan Caron’s tips over at Carsonified.

Microformat boost

The last thing I want to mention in this week’s news segment is the growing interest we are seeing in Microformats recently.

For a start Firefox 3 is going to have built in support for Microformats, which will be hugely significant in itself. However the guys over at Yahoo! are doing some interesting stuff in the area too. Yahoo! Micro Search is a new way of viewing search results that include all kinds of metadata including microformats. According to David Peterson at Sitepoint this could allow Yahoo to really challenge Google.

I am not sure whether that is true or not, but I do know it is a great time to start using Microformats. If you want to get started then check out Microformats.org or for you more advanced users have a look at this interesting demo of compound Microformats.

Feature: Hiring new staff

Marcus shares his thoughts about taking on web design staff for the first time.

Expert interview: Christian Heilmann on common Javascript mistakes

Paul: As I said at the beginning of the show, joining me today is Christian Heilmann. Hello Christian, how are you?

Christian: Hello Paul. Why it’s quite fun cause it’s Valentines day & I’m stuck with you as a date.

Paul: Well I’m sorry that you had to ah to endure me on Valentines Day but I’m sure you’ll survive. And um yeah… so basically, the reason that we’ve got you on the show today is we want to talk a little bit, a little bit about javascript. Now we’ve talked a lot of times about javascript before and it’s not a new subject, but I kind-of um… felt it would be worth touching on the kind-of common mistakes that we’re seeing a lot in the world of javascript at the moment. I think um… you know obviously javascript is very in and there’s load of cool stuff being done with it but not always in the wisest ways. Um… and then on top of that, so there’s this kind-of group of people that are doing quite advanced stuff with javascript with maybe not considering all the ramifications of what they’re doing. And there’s another kind-of group of people which are people like myself that go ‘Ewww… look at that, that’s cool I want to start doing things like that.’ And so you know a little, a little knowledge is dangerous as they say, and you know we’ve picked up books like Jeremy Keith’s scripting book and read that and now we think that we can, we can build javascript applications and are kind-of hacking things together. So I thought lets spend a few minutes looking at those, those kinds of issues. So um um… maybe probably a good place to start off if you don’t mind Christian is what advice you’d give to somebody starting to learn javascript so that, so that they kind of avoid some of these mistakes you know from the get go. What good principals, good foundations should they be working on?

Christian: Um… the main foundation is that javascript is a language in its own rights. It’s uh uh… you can not take any other knowledge and try to apply it on to javascript and this is where the two angles actually come where people that come from a higher programming language background trying to find the same principals that apply there inside javascript

Paul: Um hum…

Christian: Or people that come from CSS design background, basically think that it’s as easy as applying a CSS selector to an element that everything will be matched magically…

Paul: Yeah…

Christian: … and not realizing that there is an impact on speed and an impact on how the browser actually finds these things and what kind of mistakes the browser does. The main thing to remember about javascript is ah… there are many different ways of javascript, there are many different environments where it’s applied. So there is lots of really clever things being done right now with javascript, even on the service side and inside frameworks and inside API’s. But there’s also, in the end you would run it in a browser sooner or later. And if that’s where you are going to work the best advice is actually to not trust javascript ever and to actually um… enhance with it but not really rely on it.

Paul: Um hum…

Christian: So if there is a window print link, then this link should be generated with javascript and not just be an ‘href’ javascript window print because if somebody doesn’t have javascript or for some reason javascript’s broke, or the engine doesn’t work in your environment then you click the button and nothing happens. And there’s nothing worse than uh promising an end user something that you don’t deliver in the end.

Paul: Yeah.

Christian: The other thing is that uh… when you start from javascript, one of the first things to remember is that you should always learn the if statements and learn that they’re your best friend. Like never do: ‘apply something’ BUT IF ‘something’ THEN ‘apply something’. So if you…

Paul: Umm…

Christian: Try to access a heading with an ID for example, and then you don’t just do: HEADING ID ‘something’ = ‘something’… cause it might not be there.

Paul: Yeah.

Christian: So basically test for it, before you apply it. When you follow this principle through with all of your programming, this kind of defensive programming, then you will (we will) definitely write good javascript in any programming language really. Over the years when you get more and more experience you just learn more and more ways how the technology that you use fails…

Paul: Mmm…

Christian: …rather than actually succeeds. So you learn how to avoid the biggest pitfalls.

Paul: I mean, you always hear this thing don’t you about um… that not all browsers support javascript or that not all users have javascript turned on. I mean how real a problem is that? Is that being overly cautious to worry too much about that kind of thing or is it a real problem? Are there actually a lot of users out there that… that don’t have javascript for one reason or another?

Christian: It’s impossible to say. Its statistics and it’s a bit like flash. When you when you look at flash statistics and you hear like a 99% have it enabled on the Adobe side, then you’re like ‘Oh yeah really.’ because these are the only stats that you find…

Paul: Um hum…

Christian: …the company that delivers that is a bit like… yeah, I think that the Microsoft help pages with have a lot of hits from people with Windows.

Paul: Yeah.

Christian: So um… it’s not really a problem I don’t see the problem at all. I see the problem of people… uh, architecting and designing applications around the premise that javascript will be there, and everything will be happy and work.

Paul: Mmm hmm…

Christian: If you write your applications like javascript does not need to be there, but is nice when it’s there and actually makes it a lot smoother, then you don’t have a problem…

Paul: Mmm…

Christian: I don’t buy this whole argument of like… oh AJAX is so cool because we don’t’ have much traffic on our servers any longer. It’s like yeah, but you never know the environment that javascript is run in. It could…

Paul: Mmm…

Christian: …my mobile phone, it could be it could be an iPhone, it could be it could be an old browser. I just bought myself this eeePC that doesn’t have much memory. It’s uh… you can never expect the end user to actually cater their hardware to your needs…

Paul: Mmm…

Christian: So it’s pretty… it’s pretty unsafe to actually rely on it. So even if the statistics are ridiculously low, it doesn’t really matter because you don’t want to deliver a bad practice and deliver a bad experience to users.

Paul: Mmm…

Christian: And then there’s, of course, the SEO problems as well. If you have a navigation that’s dependent on javascript and doesn’t show anything – or you make elements clickable that shouldn’t be clickable, then you won’t have search engine spiders following these links and your sites won’t be indexed.

Paul: Mmm…

Christian: Same with accessibility. When you make something clickable that is not clickable by default, like a ‘span’ or a ‘div’ or whatever, then you can not expect a user agent actually to allow people with assistive technology or people that use a keyboard to use the same application because browsers are just not clever enough for that.

Paul: Mmm. So what about people, um… starting out as absolute beginners – what are the most common mistakes you’re seeing them make when they start out doing javascript?

Christian: A lot is copy and pasting and hoping that nothing breaks…

Paul: (Laughs)

Christian: …and ah… also um… a lot of it is skimming tutorials. A good tutorial writer will tell you a lot in the paragraphs between the code examples.

Paul: Mmm.

Christian: And um… just going through the code examples and trying to figure out what’s going there yourself and copy and pasting it does not really make you a good developer. This information was put there for a reason and actually explains you the smaller bits that you need to know about the language. ‘Cause most of the javascript errors that actually happen in the real world is not because you did a coding mistake, but because you made an application mistake that you expected a browser to do something. Or you expected an application to give you the right information back, where as you didn’t test for it. So um… I think trusting tutorials and uh… just copy and pasting code without actually knowing what it does is a very dangerous thing.

Paul: Mmm… Would you apply that same principal to frameworks? You know and not under… if you don’t understand what a framework is doing then it is probably best to avoid it.

Christian: Well it’s a matter of what it does. I mean uh… the last few years in web development have become a lot more transparent than before and that’s… Firebug is actually to blame for that.

Paul: Mmm…

Christian: It’s great because you can look at code that is generated by javascript or a backend application and you always know, you can always analyze the whole document ñ what’s doing on there if you know your Firebug. That’s another thing that I would actually tell any developer that would start with javascript to get his head around it’s like java… uh… Firebug is a great great way to learn from other people’s mistakes and also to monitor what’s going on in your scripts all the time. When it comes to library’s, that’s a bit of a different story because um… I had a bit of foot in mouth moment there when I proclaimed in the past that most library’s are bloated and unnecessary and um… now I am part of a library…

Paul: (Laughs)

Christian: …and uh I’m also I also talked to media AJAX to a lot of library developers and I realized that all the libraries do the same thing. All of them actually make the pain and the uncertainty that is browsers out there bearable for you.

Paul: Mmm.

Christian: So um… if you don’t understand what the source code of jQuery is, or the source code of the YUI is that does not mean that you shouldn’t use it.

Paul: Okay.

Christian: Other people have had that problem before you and loads and loads of people find bugs and submit bugs and help these libraries get better. So now a days if you are a new javascript developer I would basically say that you have learn the syntax, you have to learn the standards like what does DOM scripting mean, how does event handling work – but by all means if you go into a production please please use a library.

Paul: Oh okay.

Christian: Because that one take the cruft of all the fixing and uh… hacking that you have to do to make something work away from you.

Paul: Mmm.

Christian: It’s a matter of what you do. I mean if you’re doing a high traffic Twitter clone, or whatever, that runs an error application then you might have to these fixes – but you’re not necessarily going to do that as a new beginner.

Paul: Okay yeah… that that’s a very different opinion than I’ve heard in the past and it’s quite interesting to hear the other side of the argument. It’s good. So what about… what about dangerous people like me? So you know… where I knew nothing about javascript but I decided: ‘Yeah, I really need to learn this’. So I got a couple of books, I’ve read a couple of books and I’m kind of up and running but I’m not… you know I’m not a developer. I’m not somebody that’s an expert. You know… what other kind of common screwups you’ve seen people like me make?

Christian: Um… It’s tricky to say. It’s like most of the time, what these kind of people do is also try to solve problems that other technologies have with javascript.

Paul: Mmm…

Christian: Which is sometimes cool, but sometimes it’s also thinking about there’s a reason why that doesn’t work. So um… I mean the classic is… the classic is like rounded corners and things like that. There are loads of javascript rounded corner solutions which on the outskirt look like they are really clean solutions. This is also might be to put a class on a ‘div’ and to put a bit of javascript in and then everything has rounded corners and there’s no harm done.

Paul: Mmm.

Christian: That the javascript needs to inject a lot of HTML and probably is slow doing so. It’s the other side of the story it’s uh… I think people like you, that are just enthusiastic about it and basically want do it are not necessarily savvy of the implications that it has.

Paul: Yeah.

Christian: So the uh… the information that we need there is that we need a lot more tutorials on um… how javascript impacts performance. And we are starting with that already in the development network and other people are doing that as well, but there are lots of mistakes being done as well there. The other problem that I see with people that have just started with javascript, is they apply… they find one solution, they find one library then they become the biggest fan of that library then everything else is rubbish.

Paul: (Laughs)

Christian: And uh… that is a very dangerous attitude as well because you will not be, you will in your career work for different clients that will use different libraries as well. So you shouldn’t make yourself dependent on only one but understand what the benefits of each of them are and where you should apply them.

Paul: Um huh.

Christian: And how they actually make your life easier, or how they make your life less easy, than another competing product. So the implications there is that a lot of people use these newer libraries, or newer ways of using javascript, to actually make javascript behave like their favorite language or their favorite technology. That’s why people went nuts with every javascript library came up with the CSS selectors.

Paul: Yeah.

Christian: And that’s great because now I can go fifty levels deep in my CSS selector and the javascript finds what’s in there. While this is already an indicator that your HTML is not necessarily good structure

Paul: (Laughs)

Christian: …and it also means that if you change your HTML in the future you also have to change that path, or if you don’t change that path then your javascript will break.

Paul: Yeah.

Christian: And a lot of libraries break silently as well. So instead of just getting the error in your face that you’ve basically screwed up, you will not know what’s going on and will wonder what’s going on.

Paul: Mmm.

Christian: And when that happens that’s normally when people, like you, fire up emails to the library developers and tell them that their product is rubbish.

Paul: (Laughs) Yeah… I can’t disagree with that. That’s the kind of thing that I’d do probably. Um… what about, I’ll tell you the one thing that I’ve come across is that… I’m kind of competent enough to write functions to do a lot of the things that I need to do. Nothing really complicated, I couldn’t build anything too sophisticated, but you know enough to get me by. But then as I’m kind of looking at other people and what they’re doing um… a lot of them are using object orientated type techniques in the code that they are writing. There’s me hacking away with little functions and there seems to be some transition across object orientated approach when you kinda hit a certain level… you know why, what’s the benefits of that? Why do people take that kind of approach?

Christian: (Laughs) Um… It’s been very beneficial in other languages, and other environments, especially when the environment is rather sophisticated.

Paul: Mmm.

Christian: Then ah… you seen for example action script. Action script has been as much as a hacky javascript. Yeah, look what I can do if I do it this way language and now with the Flex frameworks, and Adobe opening up more and more to the java world, um… it’s getting more and more into structured ways. And the structured ways are hard to understand for somebody who is not from that background.

Paul: Mmm.

Christian: And I can safely say that, I’m not myself. So I um… I have a lot of problems with like properly, or massive structures, and frameworks. But when you see people do proper action script, for example, or do Rhino applications for the server in javascript, or some of the things that are happening with javascript 2… that there is a reason for that and the reason for that is the scalability is just so much bigger.

Paul: Right.

Christian: It’s uh… basically you can extend an object and I can reuse a class and I don’t have to worry about that. It’s like I start building these little small components, all of them in themselves tested and unit tested, and I know they work. And then I can build a bigger application from them.

Paul: Mmm.

Christian: Basically without really needing to know to test these things ever again.

Paul: Yeah.

Christian: That’s how things like PEAR and PHP and Perl libraries work as well. It’s people extending these kind of already existing bits, and bobs, rather than starting from scratch every time.

Paul: Mmm hum.

Christian: Most of the time for the little web development things that we do like the AJAX form or the Constentina navigation that’s not necessarily needed, but when you write a library for example, and it grows, like YUI is growing or like jQuery is growing as well… then you need to adhere to these standards ’cause otherwise everyone will just submit their own code in forms that are just terrible.

Paul: Yeah.

Christian: And there’s not much magic to it. I mean I get annoyed when I see javascript guys going on stage and saying like: ‘Well guys, this is a function and when it’s an object it’s a method and…’ and why should I know this? Well you should know this because you need to communicate with other developers as well sooner or later.

Paul: Umm hmm.

Christian: And these people speak that lingo and rather than you having to explain yourself for 15 minutes you could communicate in 3 minutes.

Paul: Mmm.

Christian: And that gives you more time for lunch break.

Paul: (Laughs) …or drinking…

Christian: So the worlds of hard core programming and javascript are actually getting closer and closer and seeing some of the things that browser vendors come out with and some of the other software that builds on web technologies that is being built at the moment, I don’t think that we can actually rely on our being the cool cookie web developer anymore.

Paul: Mmm.

Christian: It’s a bit like we have to have broaden our horizons the same way that backend people have to broaden their horizons when it comes to using javascript, but you can only make someone understand your problems when you understand how they tick.

Paul: Mmm.

Christian: Otherwise you start preaching to the choir.

Paul: Yeah. Okay here’s the last question to wrap up with. I’m going to open it up and let you rant uncontrollably. What are the worst mistakes that you’re seeing at the moment made with javascript, just generally.

Christian: Uh. The worst mistakes that I see are that people write little scripts for tasks over and over again.

Paul: Okay.

Christian: The same task and I see them actually tying the interface a lot to the javascript. So…

Paul: What do you mean by that?

Christian: Instead of making a javascript that actually creates the things it needs, there will be HTML that is just not necessary where the is not javascript available.

Paul: Okay yeah.

Christian: So instead of starting with the proper HTML and CSS structure, you basically have this whole gumph of HTML because there’s the javascript to clean it up anyways.

Paul: Yeah.

Christian: So um… basically the main tip is you will never ever be able to replace a proper HTML structure. It doesn’t matter where technology is going because technology will go away from that sooner or later, but at least a human could actually go there and see that there is a structure.

Paul: Mmm hum.

Christian: And that there’s a way to convert this to something better in a second step. If you’ve created a lot of spaghetti code with like HTML and javascript mixed in and lots of little scripts in there, then you will never be able to convert that to something better in the future and this is what we’ve been running in circles for years and years. We’ve never been improving things, we’ve just been fixing things and adding little bits, and bobs, to it.

Paul: (Laughs)

Christian: The other thing that I keeps seeing is well the fan boy thing, about javascript libraries and of the academic way of some people measuring javascript. You have all these like, I mean there’s people that spend like weeks finding different javascript includes and script libraries and measuring how fast they are on their computer…

Paul: (Laughs)

Christian: …generating twelve thousand objects and trying to put them on dominoes. Show me the application that needs that done, then your comparison actually makes sense.

Paul: Yeah.

Christian: It’s the same as CSS. You have like ’10 Most CSS Tricks That You Never Knew’ or ’10 Most Beautiful Naviagations’. It’s like list blog posts digging their way through the internet.

Paul: (Laughs)

Christian: And it’s the same way there right now, like I can appear immensely cleaver if I just put loads and loads of effort comparing things to each other. Instead of saying ‘this’ means use ‘that one for this one’ and ‘use that one for this one’ cause the benefits of that one library is ‘this’ and the benefits of the other library are ‘that’.

Paul: Yeah.

Christian: It normally is like, ‘Oh yeah… that library won.’ or ‘All of the others are bad’.

Paul: Yeah.

Christian: And that’s never the case.

Paul: Hmmm.

Christian: We have to get away from this putting things together randomly and making up an application, to a proper web application design and I’m going to be in New York at the end of the month, no actually beginning of next month at AJAX Worlds and my talk there will be about how to do javascript design and javascript architecture of big applications.

Paul: Mmm hmm.

Christian: That’s going to be quite interesting feedback from the audience I’m quite sure about this, but it’s a matter that we grow up, we actually have to grow up as web developers and take our stuff serious and actually make sure that we don’t build for ourselves – but we build for the guy that comes after us cause that will always happen as well.

Paul: Yeah… and that’s really good advice.

Christian: If you think like that, then you will never write bad code and sometimes people just have to suffer that themselves before they start doing it.

Paul: Mmm.

Christian: It’s always clever to think of yourself as the javascript god that can do things better anyways, but some times it’s good to leave your superhero skills in the corner and just do something that works and that’s understandable and spend some time documenting for the next guy that has to take it over from you.

Paul: And I think that applies to everybody you know people, even people doing HTML or CSS or server side stuff thinking about the next person is, yeah, hugely important.

Christian: Yeah.

Paul: Thank you so much Christian. That was very useful and I really appreciate you taking the time to come on the show on Valentine’s of all days. Good to talk to you Christian and we’ll speak soon.

Christian: See you soon. Bye.

Listeners email:

Rolling out new features

Our first listener comment is from Alex who has come up with a clever little approach for educating existing users about new features…

I just listened to show 112, where you mentioned Christian Heilmann’s javascript walkthroughs. These walkthroughs reminded me that I wanted to do something similar for our website, except I wasn’t able to squeeze it in before the deadline.

My workplace decided on a total revamp of their website, and the final design had some substantial visual and navigational changes. Among other changes, disparate logins had been consolidated into one login button. Of course, now we had the problem of habitual users; because the website hadn’t changed for several years, how do we now try to avoid several hundred support calls asking where the logins have gone?

Well, the obvious solution is to not make such drastic changes. Going for evolution, not revolution and whatnot. Failing that, is something like Christian’s walkthrough popups. However, these would still show up for new users, for whom this information would prove totally useless.

Here’s the solution I had planned:

A couple weeks before the new site or feature launch, we use javascript to set a cookie. This accomplishes two things: 1) we target people who have javascript, so we know the popups will work for them, and 2) we’ll know they were at this page *before* we changed the design or added a feature. Now, once we launch, we check for that cookie using PHP (or other server-side scripting). Why do this on the server side? Well, it lets us avoid even inserting the popup code for people who don’t have the cookie. If the cookie exists, we can then delete the cookie (so they don’t see the walkthrough again), and then insert the walkthrough divs and javascript.

Even though I didn’t get a chance to implement it, maybe this will help other people prepare for site overhauls.

What a great idea Alex. Existing users rarely like sudden changes to the sites they use regularly and often need a lot of help making the transition. This is an excellent way of doing that without confusing new users with unnecessary information.

Content management and CSS

Our second listener contribution is a question from Adrian…

Thank you very much for the show – it has been so helpful!

I have been given the job of creating an Intranet site for a small business. After listening to your shows I would love to create this website using webstandards and have been learning CSS. As well as this it is important that the users of the site can modify the content via a CMS.

So my questions are; can both of these things be satisfied? Also is it possible to design the website using webstandards and then “plug” a CMS into the already created website?

It is definitely possible for content providers to update content built using CSS. In fact it is easier, and allows the designer to maintain more control over the design. Traditionally content providers had to make all kinds of design decisions when adding content. If they needed to add a heading they had to decide what that heading looked like. If they wanted to make a piece of content stand out, they would pick a colour and font size to make that happen.

However, when a site has been built with standards the content provider doesn’t need to worry about what content will look like. They simply say this is a heading by defining it as an H1 and the CSS will decide how to style this. Equally to make something stand out they mark it as strong and the style sheet does the rest. Simple.

The only problem is that some content management systems do not have WYSIWYG editors capable of supporting this approach. They are still focused on giving the content provider design control. Fortunately there are editors out there that do think in this way. A good example is xstandard although there are others. These can just be dropped into your CMS.

Finally, it is certainly possible to plug standards based code into a CMS. Infact, it is actually easier because the style and content have been separated. A content management system is (as it name suggests) primarily concerned with content. It doesn’t care about how that content is styled. Nothing makes integration easier than nice clean meaningful markup, unencumbered by formatting.

Hiring new staff

Posted in Web strategy on February 26, 2008 by Paul Boag

Marcus’ shares his advice on finding new staff

Got this from long-time Boagworlder, Paul Bond (man of impeccable musical tastes as well ;-)…

Hi Marcus and Paul, still loving the show even after all this time.

My questions to you are: how would you advise I go about taking someone on and should I take someone on full time or on a freelance basis? Also where should I start looking to find someone? And there’s the financial side, I plan to have a couple of months wages in the pot to cover an extra person’s backup, does that sound enough? Also, whoever I take on needs to make the business money obviously so I was wondering if there was some sort of magic ratio or formula that I could use to see how my business model will fare against employing a new person?

You guys regularly employ new designers so I would be interested to hear your criteria for hiring someone new. Keep up the good work, if for nothing else, so that Rissington podcast can continue learning from the masters!

Ok, there’s a lot here! I think the first thing I need to discuss is whether Paul is looking for an employee or a partner. He mentions that whoever he takes on needs to make the business money. If he means for the new person to actually bring work in, and assuming he’s not looking to take on a sales person, then I guess he’s looking at a partner. That is, someone that fulfils a similar role to him. This would effectively be two freelancers deciding to pool their talent (and client list) with a view to expanding that client list but particularly, taking on bigger jobs.

Finding the right person for this type of role, I believe, takes a lot more than just advertising. You need to know and trust this person, so I would expect only an ex-colleague would fit the bill.

However, if you’re looking to take someone on to pump out the work while you’re out there getting more, then that’s a different kettle of fish. You can’t expect this person to make the company more money per se. Rather, you are looking at having more resources available so you can take on more work thereby raising the monthly bottom line.

There’s no real magic formula; just simply, can you make more than this person’s salary every month. If you can feed the extra mouth then you’re in a strong position to grow the company. If not, then you might want to run with it for a while anyway (if you can afford to) because staying solo does limit your options – for growth and for expanding the work you can take on which eventually leads to more work etc etc.

A couple of months ‘break even’ is what I would recommend you hold in reserve. So that adds up to your salary, the new salary plus any bills you’ve got.

I’m jumping around a bit, but let’s move on to the working together option. Not even 6 months ago I would have been indifferent to this. Basically, the pros of being able throw the net wider and the fact that a lot of people (particularly designers) like to lock themselves away (and therefore potentially make the position more appealing), meant that we tended to err towards people home working. However, my mind has definitely changed on this lately. Our development team have demonstrated that working together brings huge productivity benefits in that people constantly share problems and help each other out. This has worked out so well that we have moved the design team over to a similar model.

Ok, moving on to who to take on – taking on freelancers can often mean the difference between being able to deliver a job or not. However, they are expensive and will badly erode your bottom line if you do it all the time. So, ask yourself – if I had an employee instead of a freelancer over the past X months, how much would I have saved?

Employees are a responsibility though and need looking after. One thing we have learned over the years is that happy staff make for more productive and more effective staff.

With regard to finding staff, there are a number of options:

Employment agencies – these can be good and are often the quickest way to find suitable staff. But… they add a huge cost to the whole process.
Websites like ThinkVitamin or 37 Signals can be a very good way of finding the right people too. However, this has been very hit and miss for us.
Ex-colleagues are often an excellent bet as you know them well. I guess on this one – don’t be afraid to ask.
And, of course, advertise on your own site.

Finally, how do we decide when to take someone new on? Well, we don’t really have a set method! Usually we start to notice that workloads are getting beyond the point of just ‘busy’ and we wrangle over whether we need permanent or freelance help. Often a new client or job will tip the balance.

112. Jina

Posted in Classic shows on February 20, 2008 by Paul Boag

On show 112: How to be more efficient using HTML snippets, Jina Bolton on women in web design and moving to a mac.

Podcast: Download (30.4MB)

Download this show.

Launch our podcast player

News and events | Using HTML snippets | Jina Bolton on women in web design | Listener emails

News and events

Some customers are not worth caring about

My first piece of news is a post by Gerry McGovern. In his latest post he argues that some customer are not worth caring about.

The thrust of the article is that by appealing to everybody, you ultimately appeal to nobody. This is something I see repeatedly from clients who define their target audience as “the general public” or “men under 50.”

You also see it among developers who become overly concerned that people using IE4 with Javascript disabled might be unable to access the site. Even content providers suffer from this problem, dumping content on their websites “just in case somebody finds it useful.”

Ultimately building a website has to generate a return on investment and some customers don’t generate that return.

Version targeting rumbles on

Next up is two new articles on A List Apart, which once again tackle version targeting. Jeremy Keith argues against it, while Jeffrey Zeldman defends the position.

I have tried to stay fairly objective in my coverage of this issue. However, although I understand the position of people like Jeremy, I believe that Microsoft have done a good thing.

The arguments against strike me as somewhat naive and arrogant. We live in a world of compromise and yet as compromises go this isn’t a bad one. By adding a single line of code we have the ability to control how the market leader renders our sites. As Zeldman says…

Designers and developers should be popping corks, hugging each other, and weeping with joy. IE no longer sucks. No version of IE will ever again surprise us with unexpected displays or behavior.

Perhaps I am overly pragmatic, caring more about real world scenarios than purity of solution, but I am hopeful about the future.

Let users tagging your posts with delicious

The last news story is two posts from Christian Heilmann. The first is a Javascript technique that returns any delicious tags associated with the current page. This is a great way of introducing tagging to your site, without having to tag all of your own articles. The downside is that when users click on a tag, they are not taken to other articles you have written. Instead they see all delicious links associated with that tag. Good for the user, maybe not so good for retaining users.

The second post by Christian is another Javascript solution. This time he provides a mechanism for walking a user through the key features on your site. It generates an animated series of popup caption boxes beside different screen elements. It is definitely useful for showing off key features to new users. However, I have to wonder if a good screencast wouldn’t do the job better. Nevertheless, it is an interesting proof of concept. Check it out.

Feature: Using HTML snippets

If you are part of a web design team or skip constantly between projects, then you might want to consider an alternative approach to writing your HTML. Discover how we became more efficient at Headscape by using HTML snippets.

Expert interview: Jina Bolton on women in web design

Paul: Okay. So joining myself and Marcus today is Jina Bolton. How are you, Jina? Good to have you on the show.

Jina: I am doing well. How are you?

Paul: Yeah. Well, other than the weather that we just keep complaining about, things arenít too bad here. We are bearing up under the strain. So, for those of you that havenít come across Jina before, she is now an internationally renowned speaker

Jina: [laughs]

Paul: and author and incredible web designer. And is the kind of quality of person that is selected to appear at South by Southwest (SXSW) Marcus just for your interest that she is the kind of person they are looking for not you.

Marcus: You know, I know that because I got a magazine thing through by South by Southwest and there she was on the cover of it.

Paul: Ummm!

Jina: [laughs] Yeah. I got into a little for that too.

Paul: Why did you get into trouble for that? Who with?

Jina: The company I work or. Iím not really a speaker on behalf of that company, so

Paul: Ahhh, I see.

Jina: and they printed that company name by my name.

Paul: Right.

Jina: Anyway, different subject. [laughs]

Paul: Okay!

Marcus: [laughs]

Paul: And the company you work for will remain nameless and notorious for their strictness over things like that, so

Jina: Yeah.

Paul: There we go. But, basically yes Marcus. They want young attractive, intelligent and clever designer rather than an aging pop-star. Sorry about that.

Jina: [laughs]

Marcus: [laughs] I can live with it.

Paul: Yeah. Jina has been kind enough to let me come on her panel, so that should be fun shouldnít it? Iím looking forward to that.

Jina: Yeah, I think it will be great.

Paul: If we actually get our act together and organize it.

Marcus: But, Jina is obviously that much richer after you have paid her Paul.

Paul: Well yes. You know I did have to bribe my way on. But, it seemed to work, so that is good.

Paul: So, there are so many things we could have gotten Jina on the show to discuss. She seems to be talking a lot about CSS lately. Mainly just by putting the word sex in the title of everything she does, which seems to improve your ratings to no end.

Jina: [laughs] You found my tactic.

Paul: Yeah. It seems to work for you Jina, so thatís good. But we wanted to go for a little bit of an unusual subject. I wanted to really look at the role of women within web design because well letís face it, your kind of a rare breed in some senses Jina. There arenít as many women in web design as perhaps there should be. And I just thought that it might be an interesting subject. And Iím sure that you have some opinions on it and so maybe we can encourage I know that there are a lot of women that listen to our show that maybe havenít moved full-time into the world of web design and maybe youíve got some advice to offer. So thatís the kind of plans. Does that sound okay with you?

Jina: Sure.

Paul: Good. Okay, well letís kick off then just by asking a really kind of obvious question, but kick us off with this Do you believe that women provide something unique to the world of web design, and if so what is that? Is there actually a difference? Is there something that makes womenís role unique?

Jina: Ummm. Well I think that there is something unique being brought to the table, that personís own personal style because I think that men and women have the same skill set. Now of course there are a lot of women that have a feminine style, so they do bring that into play, but I think it is more style than it is the natural skill of designing itself.

Paul: Okay. So, do you believe that there are kind of genetic differences really? ëTheyí make all kinds of things for example that woman have better color perception than men, but men have probably got better 3D acuity and things like that. Do you think that that actually makes a difference? Or is that all so marginal, that itís not that big deal?

Jina: Well I havenít really thought about that to be honest. As for color, I donít know. I guess, you know, a woman sense of color perception is supposed to be more acute. Maybe they could bring better colors to the table, but I think the skill sets are pretty much the same. I guess, you know, a lot of men can design for men and men can design for women. I think the skill sets are the same.

Paul: Oh, okay. So you wouldnít believe say, for example, if there was a website that was primarily aimed at a female market that it should be a female designer that works on a site like that?

Jina: Ah, well. So I do think that a female designer would have an easier time knowing how to cater to a female audience because they are that audience. But I donít think that it would make the website design better. I think a man would be just as capable in creating for that female audience.

Paul: Ah, that is interesting. Marcus, what do you think about that? I kind of always naturally presumed that somebody is more capable of designing for their own gender.

Marcus: Iím surprised by Jinaís answer to be honest. But, thinking about it, it is something that you think ëYeah, it makes more sense for women to design for women.í but really itíd to do more with the content. I think it would be hard for a man to produce content for a site aimed at women. But maybe the design is something, like Jina says, is more the designers have a set bunch of skills and whether you are a man or a woman it really doesnít make any difference. So it is more of a content issue.

Jina: I do agree that it would be easier for a woman to do it, because like I said she is that audience so sheís gonna know what kind of things a woman would like. But, I donít think that would make the website design any better because a man would be able to do just the same.

Paul: Hmmm.

Jina: You know it is kind-of sort-of like to ëbring issues into ití. Like, I had a firm that was from India who was asked to design for the National Civil Rights Museum and his isnít African-American, nor was he even American, but he did a fantastic job. So, I think for gender it would kind of the same. Like, if he was African-American he probably would have had an easier time but he would still have been creative with the artistic part.

Paul: So basically, he had to work harder to achieve the good design, but he could still do it.

Jina: Right.

Paul: Hmmm. Yeah. I do see where you are coming from on that. You mentioned earlier about a kind of feminine style to design. Do you think there are differences in style? What would you class as being a particularly feminine style of design?

Jina: I think it is really color choices and font choices, as well as certain patterns like some designers I think of at the top-of my head *Vera-Ley* and *Legha Alfanterra* they both you know if you look at there websites they are very very feminine. You know my website is really feminine looking, but I think it is because of the colors theyíve chosen and the font choice weíve picked and as well as the patterns. I notice a lot of guys tend to go for the grungier things and the girls kind-of go for more of a clean look. But I think those are stylistic differences.

Paul: So when do you think that kind of where do you think that comes from? You know is that something that is trained into us? You know, blokes tend to go for grungiest stuff? Even from being a kid I guess ëboys are blueí and ëgirls are pinkí, you know, all that kind of thing.

Jina: [laughs]

Paul: But, how much of it is nature and how much of it is nurture do you think?

Jina: Ewe I have no idea. [laughs]

Paul: [laughs]

Marcus: [laughs]

Jina: But, I do think it comes from the way people are brought up like you said ëgirls are pinkí and ëboys are blueí. I think it is really what that person has come to like as they have grown up.

Paul: Hmmm.

Jina: To be honest, Iím not a real fan of pink at all

Paul: [laughs] Good for you.

Jina: but I use it in my website for some reason. [laughs]

Paul: [laughs] I mean yes. You see the trouble that you are making Jina, is that we are trying to make informed comments on this show and nothing that we ever say on this show is informed.

Jina: I think, this topic is kind of just subjective I guess.

Paul: Yeah. Basically you are saying that I picked a dumb subject. That is what you are saying isnít it?

Jina: No, no.

Paul: [laughs]

Jina: A good topic to talk about it, but it is kind of confusing.

Paul: Yeah.

Jina: You know and when I started out doing websites, I used to do websites for rock bands. And all of those sites I did were grungy so I am kind-of contradicting myself.

Paul: Ahhh. So I mean, I guess the big question is that whether you know obviously the industry that you have chosen is a male dominated industry. There are far more men out there. Certainly there are far more high profile men out there on the speaking circuits and writing articles and all of the rest of it. I mean do you perceive that as a problem?

Jina: I am not really sure if ëproblemí is the word. I do think it is getting better. I see a lot more women speaking now and even attending conferences. I see more and more women in attendance. And of course, more women writing articles in books, but I think it may have to do with that it is a fairly new field, in comparison to other design related fields. And so now that it is getting taught in schools, more and more women will start getting into it.

Paul: Hmmm. I mean that raises quite an interesting question. You know, how did you get into it then? From you know, what is your background and how did you end up being a web designer?

Jina: Well actually, my Dad was playing around with making his own personal website and I was intrigued by the idea of publishing to the Internet. So he kind of showed me really-really basic-basic HTML using font tags and tables.

Paul: Yeah.

Jina: I grew up as an artist so I went to art school and I was actually going to be a print designer, but as I was learning HTML it became my hobby and it just kind of merged and became my job.

Paul: Hugh. Okay, fair enough. It is just interesting to know. Okay, so do you think we should be you know you talked about that there are female designers learning at school these days on how to become web designers. Do you think we should be doing active as a community to encourage women to come into the profession? I mean, I know for an example, that there was a lot of talk at one stage about proactively discriminating in conferences to encourage there to be more women speakers. Publications need to make a point of using female authors in order to you know setup role models almost artificially. Is that something you would encourage or do you think that is a slippery slope?

Jina: I have mixed feelings on that. As a woman, I have definitely benefited from people that were looking for more female speakers or more female authors so it has definitely helped me. But, I think discrimination is sort of a fine line and if a guy is more capable and more skilled he really should have more of that opportunity than a woman who is not as skilled. I wouldnít want her to get in, just because she is a woman. But, the fact that there are more opportunities is helpful so I am kind-of on the fence on that one. It is sort of like the same way I feel, and I know this might be considered controversial, but the whole you know like when you get a job. Are you getting hired in my case, if I get hired because I am a woman and I am half Asian versus somebody who maybe is a White male, but who are a lot more skilled than me. I donít know how I feel about that. You know, I am all for more opportunity, I think that is a really good thing. But I think that any discrimination is discrimination.

Paul: I mean it is an interesting one, as somebodyís employer, and I donít know Marcus will feel about this but there are occasions when I really think we miss out as a company. I am sorry to say, we are an all male company, all thirteen of us. And not because we have gone out to be that, in fact precisely the opposite. Weíve often offered woman jobs and they have turned us down actually.

Jina: [laughs]

Paul: And it is a very sad reflection on us. But, I mean Marcus how would you feel about actively going out and saying ëRight, okay, we want to hire a female designer because we want that female perspective.í?

Marcus: I am not too sure how I feel about that, from an employment point of view. As an employer, I think you have to look at who is the best candidate. But what I was thinking about when we were talking about earlier, and this goes back to what I am not talking at South by Southwest (SXSW) this year

Paul: [laughs]

Jina: [laughs]

Marcus: and one of the reasons of why I am not doing that.

Paul: Itís because youíre White, middle-aged and middle-class.

Marcus: No, but one of the things the people who are organizing the panel have to look at different they have to think about ëOkay we are going to have a bunch of panels talking about business, a bunch of panels talking about designí you canít have everything. All the panels cannot just talk about business, for example. So you have to think, okay we will have to split it equally between the different types of genre, if you like. Now, doing that we also want to have an equal split between men and women, I donít think there is anything wrong with that. As an employer it is a different thing. I am not sure, where the law stands on that.

Paul: Ummm!

Marcus: Iím not sure we actually would be able to say we have to have a female employee, or whatever. I think you would be discriminating against other people by doing that.

Paul: Yeah, I guess you are. But, I think we are actually (I have to be honest) I think we suffer as a business to some degree. A classic example of that was not long ago we worked on a website for a higher education institution where over 75% of the people that went there were women. And we were having to do a design. We did the first design and we put it in front of bearing in mind all of our designers are men and we put in front of some test users and the overwhelming response back was ëYouíre trying too hard. You know it is kind of overly feminine.í And it would have been so much easier in that situation if we had a female designer there just to say ëGuys. You really donít need to make it pink and you donít need the little fairies in the corner.í

Marcus: [laughs]

Jina: [laughs] Exactly, you donít want to go with crochets with pink and flowers unless that is the brand you are going for.

Paul: Yeah, I mean that is a good question actually. Do you think there is any bear in mind there is a lot of male designers out there that are listening to this show what are the absolute no-noís? How can they design for a feminine audience without kind of really going over the top? You know, is there any kind of advice you can give, or is it just kind of feel as you go along?

Jina: I think you definitely want to get critiques from women, like if you have peers letís say you are working at a design agency and there are female designers around you, get their opinions. If you donít really have that, I donít know, I guess go to Starbuckís or something

Paul: [laughs]

Jina: and get some critiques because I am just up more for just keeping it simple and clean.

Paul: Yep. That sounds like good advice. I think we are going to have to wrap it up there Jina. Not because I am bored with talking to you, but because the sound quality on Skype sucks so much today. I think weíre gonna have to get you back on the show another time to share maybe some more stuff.

Jina: Okay.

Paul: I donít know, maybe when you are over in the UK that might be possible. Iím sure that it will happen before too long.

Jina: That sounds good.

Paul: Okay.

Jina: And it might even be our Internet connection. I am sorry about that.

Paul: Thatís alright, these things happen. I blame Marcus personally. I never have problems except for when he is on.

Jina: [laughs]

Marcus: Ha ha ha.

Jina: Thatís awful.

Paul: [laughs] Okay. Thanks very much for your time and we will talk to you again soon.

Jina: Okay. Alright.

Paul: Bye.

Listeners email:

SXSW

This week we have a couple of questions about SXSW:

Rich asks…

I am attending sxsw for the first time this year. What should I expect and how can I get the most out of it?

Last year was my first year at SXSW and to be honest it is overwhelming. Before I went I planned out all of the panels I was going to attend but to be honest I wasted my time. I don’t think it is really possible to prepare for a 10 track conference. Ultimately what you go and see will be dictated by how much energy you have left after the various parties you were attending the night before!

Talking of parties, in my in my opinion it is the social aspects of SXSW that is really the most interesting. At the end of the day, you can find out about most of the topics covered online. However, it is meeting and chatting with other web designers that is the really inspiring bit. To this end I would suggest two ideas.

First, take time to just sit in the corridors and get chatting with people. If you are in a good conversation, don’t worry too much that you are missing the panels. Its amazing who you meet just sitting around. Oh yes, and don’t be afraid to introduce yourself to anybody. Most people are friendly and if they are not… screw them!

Second, if there are people you know already attending or if there are people you want to meet add them on Twitter. That way you can see where they are and what they are up to. As a newbie last year, twitter was how I found out where all the best parties were. Definitely add me as I intend to keep twitter up to date with my comings and goings.

Talking of parties and socialising Matthew asks…

Have you considered doing a live show at SXSW?

We have considered it but have decided against it. To be honest, sxsw is manic enough without adding a live show. What is more, I don’t think live shows are that interesting to those that are not attending. This means we will not be releasing a show on the 12th March. However, we will be recording as many interviews as we can cram in, which we will be using over the coming weeks and months.

Although we are not doing a live show, that doesn’t mean we wont have opportunity to meet up. Boagworld is once again sponsoring the Great British Booze up, which is happening on Monday 10th March from 7:30pm at Shakespeare’s Pub (314 E. 6th Street). Full details at http://upcoming.yahoo.com/event/403331/

Moving to the mac

Brenda asks…

You mentioned on the Christmas list that you recently converted from Windows to Mac. How did it go? Did you have to buy all new software, or were you able to convert licenses for some of it? What was the learning curve like? What do you miss most from Windows? What would you say the overall budget for this was (emptying out that duct tape wallet)?

A very timely question Brenda. With Marcus intending to buy a mac, we have been discussing the switch. I have to say that for me it went very well. Within a week I was entirely happy working on my new macbook and could do everything I did under windows and more. I have certainly never looked back and can honestly say I miss nothing.

However, I confess I was in a luxurious position. Unlike most people I had Headscape to pay for the raft of software I had to purchase. Admittedly companies such as Adobe allowed me to transfer my license from windows to the mac (after jumping through some hoops). However, that was not always the case. Fortunately most of the software I purchased was only $30-40 each. However, that can quickly mount up. The biggest waste was on Microsoft Office. To begin with I couldn’t imagine life without Outlook and Word. In hindsight, I really didn’t need it. iWorks which costs a fraction of Office does everything I need and Apple Mail is a much more pleasurable experience than Outlook. I didn’t keep track of how much I spent on software, however I would guess it was $200-300.

Overall it was a great move and I love not only the mac OS but the great software being developed by some very cool mac developers.

To leave an audio comment for the show skype “boagworldshow” or call +44 20 8133 5122.

browsers, business, conferences, CSS, html, javascript, macs, Podcast, strategy, strategy, sxsw

HTML snippets

Posted in Development on February 18, 2008 by Paul Boag

If you are part of a web design team or skip constantly between projects, then you might want to consider an alternative approach to writing your HTML.

At Headscape efficiency is king. If you are efficient, you increase profit margins and keep prices competitive. You can only charge as much as the market allows. If you want to increase your profits you need to complete projects faster, while avoiding lowering quality.

As part of our efficiency drive we identified 4 problems…

Designers have to work with each others markup. We all code in different way and this creates a learning curve when a project gets passed between designers.
Integration HTML markup into server side applications was time consuming. Because designers coded in a different way and change their markup for each project, it was time consuming to apply that code to web applications like our in-house content management system.
Designers were constantly reinventing the wheel. Each project was built from the ground up with little reuse of markup across projects.
It was confusing switching between multiple projects. In order to ensure the most efficient use of time, designers are expected to work on several projects simultaneously. Unfortunately, switching between project is confusing because each had different markup.

We required some way to standardise tour markup.

Templating doesn’t work

At first, we produced templates for the different types of pages. For example, we had news listing, text and FAQ templates. Although this worked, they were not very flexible. As soon as the content or functionality began to deviate from the norm the templates had to be heavily customised. This undermined the benefits they provided. They also didn’t allow flexibility of design. Although content and design should be separate, it rarely works that way. Sometimes content needs to be marked up up in a particular order. Other times extra divs are required. The templates didn’t accommodate either scenario.

We needed a more flexible approach.

Using snippets

The solution was HTML snippets. Content such as news listings, forms, navigation and FAQs appear in a vast majority of websites we build. By coding these in a consistent way each time they appear, we solve all of the efficiency problems mentioned above.

Take for example news listings. Most news listings look the same. They have…

Title
date
link
description
and sometimes an image

Because of this consistency you can code in the same way each time. Content will change, each will have its own unique id and sometimes an element might be dropped (e.g. the date or image). However, fundamentally the snippet is consistent

This consistency allows…

A designer picking up the code to instantly understand what is happening.
A developer to quickly integrate it with server side code because the integration is consistent every time.
Pages to be built faster because you are dropping in pre-generated markup

In affect all the designer has to do is build an HTML framework. This consists of the overall containers (main content, secondary content etc.) He then drop snippets into that framework in whatever order he requires.

However, the benefits don’t stop there. You can also associate CSS with each snippet of HTML.

CSS fragments

If your HTML snippets are consistent, you can also build up a library of CSS fragments to support them. Take for example our news listing. Not only does it often contain the same content it is also often laid out in the same way. The image sits to the left while title, date and description sits next to it on the right. Because we know what the markup looks like, we can create this layout as a CSS fragment that can be dropped in whenever this HTML snippet is used.

We are not limited to a single CSS fragment per HTML snippet. Over time you can build up a variety of different CSS layouts for each snippet that can be used as the design dictates.

This approach provides a huge productivity benefit as the HTML and CSS can be built up in a ‘pick and mix’ fashion. However, you can also take the principle one step further and apply it to Javascript.

JavaScript functions

Each HTML snippet can have associated Javascript functions. These can be dropped in just like CSS fragments. These functions carry out common behaviour associated with that HTML snippet.

Take, for example, a FAQ snippet. A common behaviour with this snippet is to only display the answer when a question is clicked. Because we have consistent code in the snippet, it is easy to build a function that works with it and can be dropped in as required. Where possible keep your functions generic and not tied to a particular HTML snippet. However, where that cannot be done, we have standard HTML that allows us to reuse functions across projects with no editing.

Conclusions

In many ways this approach is a cross between microformats and frameworks and so in itself is not groundbreaking. However, from an efficiency standpoint, the impact is overwhelming. Without a doubt it will speed up development times and allow you to turn around projects quicker.

111. Utopia

Posted in Classic shows on February 14, 2008 by Paul Boag

On show 111: Designer and developer work together in utopian harmony. Two great listener reviews and Aral Balkan announces the biggest online web design conference ever.

Podcast: Download (31.2MB)

Download this show.

Launch our podcast player

News and events | Designers and developers in perfect harmony | Aral on Singularity | Listener emails

News and events

Fixing your product pages

I want to kick off this week’s news with an article on Think Vitamin which I missed when it originally come out back in November. It is a post by Amy Hoy providing some basic advice on user experience design, focusing in particular on product pages.

Amy starts by giving some basic tips. These include…

Be nice to your users and customers (and potential customers).
Design as if your main goal is to inform and educate.
Be honest and forthcoming.
Help your users and customers to do what they want, not what you want them to do.
Be consistent with your message and quality of service (and I’m including software design here, folks).
Scientific, measurable “usability” doesn’t necessarily make for a good experience.
Good design makes people feel good.

She then moves on to look at specific examples. She compares the product download pages of Opera and Firefox. This is a fascinating insight into what can go wrong with user experience design.

What I particularly like about this article is Amy’s engaging writing style. She is incredibly personable and her writing really drew me in. It is a long time since I have read a post word for word.

Being inspired by newspaper design

I often talk on boagworld about looking beyond the web for inspiration. Too often as designers we look at other websites, when we should be looking to art, architecture and the world around us for inspiration.

Admittedly this can be somewhat of a stretch at times. It’s not always easy to see how a piece of art or kids toy can inspire a website. Many of us don’t even try as a result.

How about starting with an easier comparison? This week I came across a superb post that looks at award winning newspaper design and it really excited me about the possibilities when I finally get around to redesigning boagworld.

I think we have a lot of learn from newspaper designers and in many ways there are a lot of similarities. Both web design and newspaper design rely heavily on white space and grid layout. Both have to deal with large amounts of written content. Both have to copy with constantly changing content. The list goes on.

Take a few moments to read this post, even if you just look at the designs. It will definitely inspire you.

Using browser history to improve the user experience

My final news story of the day is an interesting idea centred around a users browser history. Niall Kennedy has proposed a technique where you could use CSS and Javascript to display content based on what sites a person has previously visited.

Although I am not sure I like the idea of websites snooping through my browser history, it does provide some ways of improving the user experience. If nothing else it can remove some of the clutter from our websites.

Let me give you an example of how it could be used. A website could check your browser history to see if you regularly used digg.com. If you did then it could post a “digg it” button. If not it could be hidden away. The same principle could be used to show only a RSS subscribe button for the specific news reader you use, rather than showing them all. The possibilities are endless.

Whether you can see an application for this or not, it is still a very impressive and clever idea. Definitely worth investigating further.

Feature: Designer and developer in perfect harmony

In this week’s feature Marcus is looking at the working relationships between web design teams. He brings together a few Headscape employees to discuss how to ensure a good working relationship between all parties.

These are the roles that we look at and who represents them in Headscape:

Requirements analysis, information architecture development (consultancy) – Marcus
Design, templates – Leigh Howells and Paul
Technical development – Rob Borley
Project management – Charlie Allen

These are the issues we covered…

What are the things that really make a project work well for you?
From the other perspective, what are your pet hates?
Designer and developers – should clients be able to talk to you directly?
Most projects have a habit of their scope creeping. How can that best be avoided?
At Headscape we use a number of different tools to manage projects. How do these tools work?
Particularly with designers and developers, we have set up ‘buddy’ systems. How does this work? Is it effective?
Some projects stall or go on hold for a while. Are you able to just pick up where you left off?

Expert interview: Aral Balkan on Singularity

Paul: So, joining me today is Aral Balkan. Hello Aral.

Aral: Hi, Paul. How are you?

Paul: Not too bad. It’s been a while since we’ve had you on the show.

Aral: It has been a while. I’ve missed it.

Paul: Uhm, so yeah, basically, I’ve been keeping a secret from Marcus. Which is I stoically refused to tell him what Singularity is all about.

Aral (laughing): Was he curious?

Paul: He was.

Marcus: It’s something to do with Star Trek, isn’t it?

Aral: Well I am a big fan, but no.

Paul: So why don’t you tell him what Singularity is all about.

Aral: Well, Singularity is going to be the world’s first large scale online web converence.

Marcus: Okay.

Aral: In a nutshell, that’s what it is.

Paul: So, I mean how does this work from a technology point of view, from an organizational point of view. Tell us a little bit about how it’s going to be organized.

Aral: Uh, sure! Well, basically it’s a web conference, so in terms of topics, it’s very eclectic. We’ve got a really cool group of speakers who have confirmed already, about 24 of them, from all parts of the web really. We have web standards people. We have JavaScript developers. We have artists who work on the web and they’re going to be presenting their sessions online. It’s going to be streamed through a custom interface built in Flash, based on the Flash platform, using technologies like Adobe Connect which used to be called “Breeze”. It allows the real time streaming of audio, video, and also sharing of interactions or objects through the web. Beyond that, we’re also going to have a very local character to it with local hubs where people will be able to gather and watch the audience and interact.

Paul: Oh, ok, so it…

Aral: I mean, watch the conference and interact.

Paul: Right, so people will actually get together as well, because that was one of my questions. One of the best thing about conferences is meeting up with people.

Aral: Definitely! The bit that I don’t like is the travelling. It’s being stuck in coach next to someone who’s, you know, not feeling too well or is kind slumping onto your seat or having the hotel from Hell experience that I’m currently having over here. (Paul laughs)

Aral: Don’t even get me started on that. There was techno music until 2 AM from the bar downstairs.

Paul: Nice!

Aral: Well, it was refreshing in the morning, though, because the shower went from boiling from freezing back to boiling and kept doing that. So, yeah, I think this is going to hopefully take the best parts of what attending a conference means, and maybe leave some of the bits that aren’t as great.

Paul: Are you going to leave it for local groups to set up local meetings or is that something that you can organize centrally?

Aral: I want to see it as decentralized as possible. I am talking to a few venue sponsors, potential venue sponsors. We’re talking with Yahoo at the moment. The BBC, I’m talking with Ian there. There are very interested and very excited about it. But, beyond that, I want it to have a grass-roots character. So, we’re already getting people volunteering for regional areas. I’ve called them Ambassadors. We have an ambassador from Bristol and there are people from Singapore, Mexico, all over, that are very interested in volunteering. So, we’re probably going to have regional volunteers and ambassadors who organize local groups, user groups, to have meetings around Singularity, where attendees can go and join and hopefully take it further, you know, add a local character to it.

Paul: OK, let’s cover some of the basics. How many speakers are you looking at, first of all. Let’s start with that.

Aral: Okay. We’re going to have a little over 100 hundred speakers.

Paul: Wow!

Aral: So, yeah, it is actually a large web conference.

Paul: Yeah.

Aral: And the that its online.

Paul: So when… how long is this going to be over? You know, if you’re going to have 100 speakers…

Aral: It’s three days.

Paul: It’s going to be over three days…

Aral: And it’s multiple track.

Paul: Multiple track, okay. That’s what I was going to ask.

Aral: And I think one of the things, just cut you off there, with uh… it is multiple track, but everything is recorded.

Paul: Oh, Okay.

Aral: So, its presented live and we’ve got some really great ideas for making those presentations a little bit more interactive than you can get in the real world. But, it will also be recorded. So, if you do miss something on the day, you’ll be able to watch it later.

Paul: Cool! How are you going to deal with things like time differences? Are you going to have it going 24 hours? Or, how are you dealing with that?

Aral: Well, initially, I was thinking about having it 24 hours. Just because it sounded really cool.

(All Laugh)

Aral: You know? “Three days! Twenty four hours!! One hundred plus speakers!!!” But then I thought about it. Especially the local meet ups. I want those meet ups to have a BarCamp-like character to them, you know? Where people can stay over. And I didn’t want the conference, the somewhat one-way part of it taking up part of the day.

Paul: Right…

Aral: So, I think it would be nice to have the presentations during the day and then after that, leave time for people at local gatherings to create their own sessions to talk about what they’ve been listening to, to add to it, to localize it for themselves in a matter of speaking.

Paul: Sure.

Aral: You know, to have, to do things to tell you the truth, I have no idea what they’ll come up with, which is great.

Paul: So, when is this scheduled for? What are the dates that people should book for it?

Aral: Well, we finally have dates. We’ve been going back and forth internally before we announced, but it’s the end of October. October 24th through the 26th.

Paul: Okay, that sounds good. And do you know a price yet, or are you still working on that?

Aral: Well, the pricing we’re still working on, but I think we’re going to be very positively surprised by the pricing. We’re actually working to get it even lower than we initially thought we wanted it. And we’re working closely with certain sponsors and we’ll definitely be announcing more about the sponsorship that we have as they become official, but some of our sponsors are interested in keeping the ticket price low as well and supporting us.

Paul: So, how many people are you expecting to attend this conference? Have you got any idea of what you’re aiming for?

Aral: Well, my conservative estimate right now is 10,000.

Paul: WOW!

Aral: And that’s based partly on past experience. We did 2 one-day open source flash conferences using similar technologies, for which we got about a thousand attendees at each one. Those were much smaller. One day, three or four speakers. My conservative estimate is that this will be about ten times the size of that.

Paul: That’s amazing. I mean that will be really cool to, you know, if that comes off. Are you trying to get a range of different speakers? Are you covering any particular areas of web design or are you going as eclectic as you can?

Aral: Well, the tagline that I was going with initially was that Singularity would define web 08. And I’m kind of trying to get people away from using version numbers when talking about the web. We’re getting away from using version numbers when talking about software because you know the moment you slap one on its outdated. So, I think maybe using the year would be easier because you’d at least know that you’re talking about a definite stat of time. So, my initial idea is that it would define Web ’08, and as such, I’m trying to get as eclectic a mix of speakers as possible. And also, I see that there is a lot of overlap with which to send applications for example. There’s a lot of overlap over what people using AJAX are doing and then traditionally web standards people are getting interested in applications as well. So, I want to have a real mix. I also don’t want people on the Flash platform to be excluded, as they sometimes are. But, this is definitely not… that’s not the focus of the conference.

Paul: So, where can people find out more about this? I mean obviously, some people are going to want to be signing up. Obviously, you can’t do that yet, until the price has been set. So, is there any kind of way (

Aral: Of course.) they can express their interested or find out more information or whatever?

Aral: They definitely can. The site is “singlularity08.com”. You can also get to it from “singularityconference.com”. And, basically, we have a blog there and you can express your interest. You can email me directly as well. My email address is “[email protected]”. Or just email my private address at “[email protected]”. Yes, so definitely, if you want to be kept in touch when we do release information, but there is also an RSS feed that you can subscribe to on the site.

Paul: Cool! Well thank you very much for coming on the show.

Aral: Thank you for having me, Paul. And of course you’re speaking.

Paul: Well, yes, of course. That goes without saying (Paul laughs).

Aral: Are you excited? Have you decided what you are speaking about?

Paul: I have not a clue yet, no. (Aral laughs)

Aral: Have I just put you on the spot?

Paul: Yes, totally. Thank you very much. (Aral laughs) And its going to be a weird one. It’s going to be a different way of speaking and so you kind of need to tailor what you’re doing to approach. It will be interesting.

Aral: Exactly. And we’re going have dry runs and we’re going to try out the interface as well.

Paul: Cool.

Aral: And maybe tweak it for different types of presentations. We just have so much potential with what we can do.

Paul: Mmmm. Yeah.

Aral: Because, we can actually control the medium. So, it’s really exciting.

Paul: Excellent! Excellent stuff! Really looking forward to it and we’ll get you back on the show closer to the time to see if we can drum up a bit more support for it. Excellent stuff. Thank you for your time.

Aral: Sounds great, Paul. Thank you so much.

Paul: Alright then.

Listeners email:

An alternative wireframing tool

A few weeks back I talked on the show about wireframing tools. Not long afterwards I received an enthusiastic email from Wen talking about a product called OverSite. He was so passionate about the product that I thought we should get him on the show to talk about it. This is what he had to say…

I’ve been catching up on my episodes of BoagWorld, and I just recently listened to your discussion about wireframing. As a UI designer, I completely understand the importance of mocking up a UI, and testing the mockup, before ever launching Photoshop.or Dreamweaver. So I thought I’d provide a review of a wireframing tool that I use, called OverSite. I haven’t seen many other tools out there like it, so I figured you and your listeners might find it useful.

OverSite is a shareware application that runs on Windows as well as Mac OS X; I use the Mac version myself, but am able to exchange OverSite files back and forth with my PC-using colleagues. OverSite lets you create a full or partial representation of your site structure: all of the sections and pages that make up your site. You can do this in one of two ways. The first way is fairly predictable; you add one section or page at a time by clicking a button, entering a name in a popup dialog, and clicking OK. The second way is fairly clever. You open a window that OverSite calls the Rapid Structure Creator. There, you type out your entire site structure in one text area, putting line breaks between sections and pages, and using indentation to indicate nested levels. Then you just click OK and viola! OverSite generates a tree depicting your entire site structure.

At this point, you can dive into your wireframing. Each page contains its own wireframe canvas. You can place the usual widgets on the canvas: buttons, textfields, checkboxes, images, etc. You can also place basic geometric shapes like circles, rectangles, lines and stars on the canvas. Each component can be individually styled; you can also create global styles that apply to all components, or to components of a specific type. OverSite also lets you create what it calls composites, which are complex elements that are made up of individual widgets.

Let’s say that you have a search form that will appear on a few different pages. You can create a composite representing this form. The composite might contain a few labels and text fields, maybe a checkbox or two, and a couple of buttons. If you want, you can tell OverSite to automatically draw a border around the form elements. Once you’ve created that form composite, you can drop it into your wireframes where ever you want it.

OverSite does lack built-in, complex widget types, such as tables. You can create them out of the widgets that OverSite does provide, but it would be nice for OverSite to create them for you.

While each page has its own wireframe canvas, so does each section. The purpose of a section’s wireframe is to create elements that will appear on all of the pages within that section. For those who have used server-side-includes, it’s kind of like that. As an example, say you had a navigation bar that should go on the top of every page in your Products And Services section. You would create that navigation bar once, in the Products And Services wireframe canvas. Then the nav bar will appear in every page within that section. In addition, OverSite provides tools to modify that nav bar in specific pages, for example, to change the color of a specific link in the nav bar when you’re actually on the page that that link refers to.

Static wireframes are fine, but I prefer being able to test the interaction between screens before I actually build the site out. OverSite lets you link any widget or composite to another page. If you don’t want to do the work yourself, you can also tell OverSite to auto-generate a simple navigation bar. Then, you can use OverSite’s built-in web browser to test out your site’s navigation.

Another useful thing I’ve found is OverSite’s notes. The notes functionality lets you provide details about specific widgets. That way, when you print or export your wireframes, you can include more information to whomever you’re handing them off to.

As an added bonus, OverSite will also create a graphical sitemap based on your website structure. You can tweak the appearance of the sitemap… the operative word being “tweak”. Fonts, colors, spacing, and icon sizes are under your control, but not much more. Here’s where I think the application could do better to allow you to fully customize the sitemap. Still, it’s created automatically for you without your having to lift a finger, so that’s something. Plus, the sitemap can be exported into a number of formats: GIF, JPEG, PNG, PDF, Scalable Vector Graphics, and others.

Once you’ve finished your wireframes and want someone else to be able to play around with them, you can export them as web pages for non-OverSite-using people to click-through. You have two options here: export your stuff as pure HTML, or export them as imagemaps. The trade-off between the two is fairly obvious: pure HTML will provide you web pages that looks more “real world”, but won’t look exactly like your wireframes do, and they’ll look different in different browsers. Imagemaps ensure that you know exactly what your pages will look like, but it’s typically not going to look like a real web site.

As a UI designer, OverSite’s become a pretty indispensable tool in my software arsenol. You can get it at the developer’s website.

A vertical rhythm calculator

In the same show we also had Jason Beaird talking about vertical rhythm (among other things) and this promoted an email from James. He wrote…

Hi I’ve been listening to your podcast for about six months now and really enjoy the mixed style of content and witty banter.

With all the talk of CSS vertical rhythm and em based layouts I thought I would point you in the direction of a vertical rhythm calculator that I built in Flex to help people work out all of those nice em values. My own site has been developed using the same principles with all typography and measurements set in em’s for an elastic layout. I am developing an AIR version that has an integrated browser so that you get visual feedback of your calculations, I remember one of the John’s comment on how useful such a tool would be on the fabulous Rissington podcast.

I have checked it out myself and have to say it is very impressive. What is more he has now created that desktop version. Check it out.

110. The mighty Meyer

Posted in Classic shows on February 6, 2008 by Paul Boag

On Show 110: Eric Meyer on version targeting, the business benefits of usability testing and do I have to have a blog?

Podcast: Download (36.0MB)

Download this show.

Launch our podcast player

News and events | The profit and loss of usability | Eric Meyer on version targeting | Listener emails

News and events

Before we kick off the news section today I should point out that I actually link to many more articles, tutorials and news stories than I ever include on the show. If you go to boagworld and click the links in the header you can receive all of these posts by either email or RSS.

CSS reference library

Raise your hands if you have ever used the W3 School. Okay put your hand down now because you are looking kind of stupid. For those of you who didn’t raise your hands the W3 School is a comprehensive reference sources for almost every web language around. It really is very impressive.

The problem is that it doesn’t provide the nicest user experience. If you are looking for CSS reference information then a possible alternative is the new Sitepoint reference section. At the moment it only includes information on CSS however they are obviously looking to expand.

Its design is a lot more attractive than W3 School and although it is not as comprehensive it will provide you with all the latest information on CSS properties including CSS 3. It also provides you with an indication of which browsers support that property.

Stay on :target

Talking of CSS 3 there is an interesting article by Brian Suda over at Think Vitamin entitled Stay on :target. Target is a new CSS pseudo-class being introduced in CSS 3. Although it has yet to be implemented by Internet Explorer it is supported by many other browsers.

Essentially what target does is allow you to style a target element in much the same way you can style on hover. So when you click on a link that goes to a fragment identifier (what used to be called anchor links) then it styles that fragment.

So for example a good use of this attribute would be to highlight the content that you have just been jumped to (like the fade to yellow technique) or to hide and show content when the user clicks on a tab.

Of course many of you might be asking why I bring this up when it isn’t supported in IE. Well, not only is it an interesting glimpse into what is to come, it can also be used right now when the functionality provided isn’t crucial. For example you wouldn’t want it to hide and show content but it might be okay to highlight linked content with it.

Read the article and you can see the potential yourself.

Search behaviour patterns

Another article worth reading is Search behaviour principles over at Boxes and Arrows. This article looks at how people search and the different types of searchers there are. It also looks at what things affect the way people search and techniques that can be used to accommodate their approaches.

As I have said before on this show, not enough attention is given to search and this article will really get you thinking about how to better accommodate it. Best of all there are still a lot of hints that can be applied here even if you are lumbered with an inflexible search mechanism that cannot be customised or tweaked.

10 principles of effective web design

Talking of search usability brings us nicely on to our final story of the day which is a post from Smashing magazine. We haven’t mentioned them in a while but this week they are back with another top ten list. This time it is the 10 principles of effective web design.

Personally I think it is a misleading title as actually the post is about basic usability techniques. That said, it is a very good list and contains some really solid advice. It also contains lots of examples which really helps you get your head around the issues.

I don’t think the post has a lot to offer seasoned usability testers but if you have always avoided the subject in the past then this is a nice simple starting point.

Feature: The profit and loss of usability

We have looked at the subject of usability testing relatively recently on the show and have mentioned it countless times before. However, never have we taken a step back and asked the fundamental question: why is usability testing important? This week we look at how usability testing can be presented to clients and dispel some of the misconceptions about it.

For more detail on what we cover read my post The profit and loss of usability.

Expert interview: Eric Meyer on version targeting

Paul: So on last weeks show we discussed Internet Explorer 8 and some of the plans Microsoft have for it and joining me this week is Eric Meyer. Hello Eric, good to have you on the show.

Eric: Cheers, hello.

Paul: Cheers, very British of you.

Eric: I try to localise my content.

Paul: Yes, very good. Most impressed! We’ve got Eric on the show really because this whole news surrounding Microsoft and what they were planning to do was broken on the A List Apart website, in 2 articles, one of which Eric wrote. The reason I think I wanted to get you on the show to talk about it is because I was kind of struck by the honesty of your article that a lot of what you were saying was very much ‘I really don’t want to like this idea but…’ kind of attitude. Which is the kind of attitude that I think goes down well with the people that listen to this show. So I was wondering Eric, could you kick off by giving a brief explanation of what it is that Microsoft are proposing doing, just so that we’ve got a bit of an understanding of it?

Eric: Um, well pretty much what they’re proposing is that Internet Explorer, Internet Explorer 8, and in the future will recognise a single element, a meta tag which can be used to say ‘This is the version of Internet Explorer that I want you to act like’ so that Internet Explorer 11 can act like Internet Explorer 8 did, or Internet Explorer 7.

Paul: Right.

Eric: So the idea basically is well they call it Version Targeting so that you can have your page actually targeted to a certain version of Internet Explorer even if newer versions have come out.

Paul: Ok. So, I mean at face value that sounds very much like browser sniffing, which is obviously something that has kind of become considered bad practice. How does it differ?

Eric: Well my perspective is that it differs because it actually reverses the direction of sniffing. Browser sniffing To date it has been a case of authors trying to figure out what browsers they want to sniff for and what should happen as a result. This was sort of the reverse side of. It would be the browser sniffing the page to say, ‘What do you want me to do?’, at least in the case of Internet Explorer. It should be clear that Microsoft has so far as I am aware anyway not proposed that anyone else has to do this, or that this has become any part of any sort of standard. They’re saying if it is what we want. This is what we’re planning to do on the browser. So they have the same echoes. I really feel like they are not the same thing. There are a lot of people who disagree with me but they are really very different because one of the reasons that browser sniffing by authors has become viewed as a bad practice is because it becomes fragile over time. First of all there’s a case of people saying ‘If this is Internet Explorer do such and so’, and they don’t consider that there might be a version this version of Internet Explorer that might change what I’m trying to work around. Another reason is that people make guesses about what will be in user agent strings which is usually what people browser sniff on and sometimes those guesses turn out to be wrong as when Safari first came out its user agent strings had the phrase White Gecko in parenthesis.

Paul: Yeah.

Eric: A lot of people had done browser sniffing scripts that looked for the word Gecko so all of the scripts thought that Safari was Mozilla, Firefox or whatever and so some of them broke. In a way it is hard to fault the authors because how are they supposed to know a browser from Apple, not based on Gecko, would have the word Gecko on it’s user agent string and yet that happened so this would be much more controlled it seems to me were it would be browser saying ‘What do you want me to act like?’ and that’s the other reason this has varied from browser sniffing usually tries to predict the future, whereas this version targeting that looks like it will happen in Internet Explorer it actually has to predict the past which is inherently easier to do.

Paul: Why has Microsoft decided to take this position? It seems to me like in some ways they’ve created a rod for their own back in the sense that they are producing I don’t know, Internet Explorer 11 and in that has got to be the rendering engine for 10, 9, 8, 7 and all the way back. Is that not just a lot of work on their part? What’s driving them in this direction?

Eric: I think it will be a lot of work on their part. I do not believe that the idea is to have completely separate rendering engines for each of those browsers, but to have effectively if then else statements in the rendering engine or cases or switch statements for a little more program language savvy. The reason that they’re doing this is that they really have a problem, well they have a dilemma, and they need to get out of the dilemma. The dilemma that they face is basically this: There are a lot of pages out there both on the public web and in private intranets that were developed to IE6 or IE7 let’s say and weren’t developed in an open standards way they weren’t developed the way a lot of people in the standards movement develop sites which is to code to the standards and then figure out how to work around the problems that they encounter. If you have an intranet, a massive intranet site, and your company standard is IE7 the default tendency is to develop it to IE7, you use behaviours that are not correct according to the standard, but are the way that IE7 acts. You have all these past mistakes which every browser makes past mistakes. IE7 it can be argued has made more mistakes than others, not an argument I want to get into. They have that situation where there’s this large legacy of pages. So they can’t have those break for a number of reasons, many of them business reasons, actual monetary reasons but at the ground level you could look at it as if the browser changes enough that those pages start to break it becomes a bad browsing experience for users of that browser. At the same time, the Internet Explorer team would like very much to improve their standards support. They did this for IE7; they fixed a lot of things. They went more towards the updating the browser and didn’t worry quite as much about breaking sites, and they got into quite a lot of trouble over it both internally and externally. There were people who took on the task for breaking the web. We’ve been here before as an industry back in 2000. This is how DOCTYPE switching became to be because the first few iterations of IE and Netscape did very badly at CSS support. They tried and more power too them but Internet Explorer got the box model wrong. Netscape got so many things wrong that they had to junk it and start off with a new browser. So DOCTYPE switching was basically invented as a way of being able to say ‘Given these criteria render pages the way they used to be rendered and give them these other criteria go the more standard route’. From the Microsoft prospective this is like a super DOCTYPE switch except in this case instead of hinging it on a DOCTYPE they’re hinging it on information about what the browser version is.

Paul: Yeah. It is interesting when I first heard about this and I first read your article and the other one on A List Apart, my initial reaction was oh no all this feels wrong and indeed which is what in the sense you said that you went through when you were writing the article and then we actually were discussing it on last weeks show with John Oxton and John Hicks, the same kind of thing came out that we felt very uncomfortable with this and we were reflecting on a lot of things that were said including Jeremy Keith who made this point of you’re actually in a position where you’re actively having to tell Internet Explorer 8 how to behave like Internet Explorer 8 and not IE7, which seems a bizarre set of circumstances but since then I’ve been thinking about it a little and I’m struggling to come up with a reason that I really object to this beyond a principle of the thing that I feel like I shouldn’t agree with it but I’m having trouble articulating why I guess. What kind of things are you seeing? You must have seen a lot of objections come up when you are brave enough to step up and say what you did on A List Apart, I’m sure there was quite a backlash. What kind of things are people saying and throwing against this?

Eric: Well I can see quite a few objections.

Paul: *laughs*

Eric: Well one of them is an objection that Jeremy brought forth which I think I am glad that were talking about that which is that the default behaviour is to default to IE7 as I understand. So when IE8 comes out, if it doesn’t see this version target meta tag in a page it will assume that page is to be treated as IE7 would have treated it, which again completely reverses what were used to. What were used to is when a new browser comes out the page will be interpreted according to the latest and greatest unless you’re using a quirks mode DOCTYPE switch but anyway, it’s bizarre, and yet I did go through the same thing when I first saw it I was like &#”;What!&#”; *laughs*

Paul: Yeah.

Eric: Good old WTF basically.

Paul: *laughs*

Eric: And when I first saw this it was at the beginning of January when Aaron Gustafson submitted the first draft of his article, I hadn’t actually heard about this before then, and I started arguing with him about it in the A List Apart editing forum and very quickly came to realise, &#”;Why am I objecting to this?&#”; and I took the time to step back and say &#”;What’s the deal here?&#”; and that’s were my article came from with the two of us going back and for and it was like, could you write an article about that because that’s what a lot of people are going to go through. So there’s the default behaviour, you have to have the meta to have the latest and greatest, yeah, I would like to see that changed, I would like to have Internet Explorer act the way browsers always have because that’s what I’m used too, but at the same time I have to be realistic about the problems that they face, that I was explaining before.

Paul: Yeah, because that wouldn’t solve their fundamental problem which is that people that aren’t aware of working to the latest standards aren’t going to be aware that they have to put meta data in there pages either.

Eric: Right, so people have said that Microsoft, of anyone, are in a position to educate people who are not aware of the need to do that one thing and that’s the point I made when I was talking to a member of the IE team about this. There are other objects that I think mostly have been related to that for example Bruce Lawson posted just in the last few days, the default behaviour means that from an accessibility point of view any page that doesn’t have this meta tag is stuck with IE7′s accessibility support which apparently is not were it should be, so he’s made the point that freezing pages to IE7 in the absence of any other information freezes them in this inaccessible state, I’m not an accessibility expert so I don’t know how best to categories that but, will have accessibility problems and keep them for years and years as opposed to, ya know, as accessibility problems improve in Internet Explorer, getting those benefits and that a very real objection and a very real concern, and I think one that needs to be made to the Microsoft people because accessibility is very important. There are other objections from the javaScript community, it’s actually been interesting in the javaScript community, there’s been a real dichotomy, there have been some javaScript library authors who’s been like &#”;Yes! Finally, thank god somebody is talking about versioning!&#”; right, and there’ve been others who have been like &#”;Oh my god, are you kidding, libraries will have to support all these backwards engines&#”;.

Paul: Yeah.

Eric: Again, I’m not an expert to know what side of that certain dichotomy I would come down on, in my own blog posts I’m saying, wouldn’t you just use object detection and not worry about what the version number is?, but I guess that doesn’t fully address the problem, or at least that’s what I’ve been told. Again it’s something that needs to be figured out, because there have been some fantastic javaScript libraries and fantastic things that can be done with those and if this is a move that will hamper the growth of that field then that’s something else that would also bother me. There’s also the security objects, the idea that every backwards versions that you have your complicating your ability to keep your security holes closed, that’s the kind of thing we’re I have to say &#”;Look that’s down to the browser maker to figure out&#”;.

Paul: I guess that the problem with the whole default behaviour thing is how badly it’s going to break things, how many sites are going to be broken if the default behaviour was the latest browser and how badly are these sites going to be broken, are they going to be unusable? Are we talking about some small changes? I guess there are a lot of websites out there as well that just aren’t supported at all, content has been put online, nobody is checking them, nobody is checking when a new browser comes along, and if when IE8 was released and those websites became completely inaccessible and unusable then obviously there’s a big issue there because your loosing vast amounts of content on the web. I guess a lot of it is unknown entities at the moment isn’t it? It’s guess work.

Eric: Yeah. There’s a lot of guess work and that’s part of the problem, I think if we knew, if there were some kind of statistics, like if the IE team were to come out and said we built a version were the default behaviour was latest and we tested it against these 1000 QA sites and 20% of them broke, 5% were completely unusable, that would be one thing, or if they said we tested and 2 sites were broken, you could still read them but they look a little weird, that would be different and nobody does really know and at least nobody outside of Microsoft and maybe not even them, I don’t know if they’ve done that kind of testing yet. And, I’m sorry, there is one other objection that come from a couple of other browser manufacturers that this is in affect, anti-competitive, whether it’s meant to be or not, but it has that effect because Internet Explorer has such a large market share they have to worry about what it does and so to them it becomes a lot harder to do that, so if they are going to keep up this effort it’s going to become a lot harder to do in this version targeting world after a few releases, of course the question is whether they would need to do that or not and there’s a lot of debate about that, there are people who are like, &#”;Just stop, stop making reference to Internet Explorer and just let it strangle itself to death&#”;. I don’t want to get into all the back and forth that’s happened but that is another objection.

Paul: I guess, is there some danger here as well that once you’ve got this version targeting in place Microsoft could go off on some complete tangent and start introducing all kinds of proprietary functionality into their browser that isn’t supported in the other and we end up in a situation were we’re having browser wars again with different browsers implementing different proprietary tags and stuff like that, or are we truly beyond that do you think?

Eric: Umm, It is certainly a risk and how much of a risk influences were people stand on this. I don’t see that personally as being much of a risk, because yes, the Internet Explorer team could introduce a load of proprietary properties that let an author change the colour of the browser kernel right or replace the backwards and forwards buttons in the browser, whatever, and if nobody else supports that, I think those efforts will largely support them strangling themselves, I mean, colours scroll bars we don’t really hear about anymore, people will still do them, but nobody else really cares.

Paul: Yeah.

Eric: So, I would not claim to be smart enough to see everything that could possibly be done but I think in a lot of ways that might not be a bad thing, because it would let Microsoft experiment with less constraints, they can do initial implementation of things that are in CSS3 and if the behaviour of those things changes, in a later version they can fix what they did, they can change to match the spec, and then still have backwards compatibility for pages that took assumption of that, there are people that would say &#”;Well they should never implement anything that hasn’t been completely nailed down&#”;, but that doesn’t really work, because one of the ways that you get yourself out of the candidate recommendation stages at the W3C is to have implementations and the only way to have implementations is for someone to implement them and if they find out during that phase, and this is what the candidate phase is about, if they find out in that phase that such and such property that has been specified, doesn’t work in the real world for whatever reason, they’re then able to go back and change it, but in the mean time if your Internet Explorer and 11′ty billion pages have been implemented to your particular version of the property.

Paul: So, you wrote this A List Apart article that went out of the 21st of January, and we should probably say that we’re recording this interview on the 29th of January and it’s not going to go out for another week, so things might move on in-between but there’s obviously been a lot of discussion since you released that article, have your views really changed in any way, are you still in favour of this approach or have there been more concerns raised that have made you doubt it?

Eric: Hmm, I’m still in favour of the general idea, the implementation I’m a little less, I guess I would say I’m more agnostic about, but the general idea of backwards compatibility so as not to break sites, whilst still being able to change and improve and fix the browser I’m all in favour off. The default behaviour still bothers me, and I’m still having trouble working out if there is a case of honest to goodness technical reasons or it just feels wrong, there has to be something, how’s it’s gone about is a different question, if the IE team and the people that they have to answer to effectively can be convinced that having the default behaviour switched and then educating people whole want to freeze their sites, on how to freeze there sites using the meta, they can be convinced to do that and that that will fix the problems that they face then I’m all for it. Accessibility concerns do bother me and I think that that’s another argument in favour of switching the default behaviour but at the same time I also have to recognise that switching the default behaviour, as you said earlier, from a certain prospective, completely negates the entire reason to do this, given a certain set of circumstances if they’re going to switch the default behaviour it might almost as well not even do it. Again though that also depends on how much breakage on how many sites and what kind.

Paul: Yeah.

Eric: The other unknown that we’re facing here is we don’t yet know just how different the IE8 behaviours are compared to IE7, we have a clue in that we already know that there’s an internal build of IE8 that can support the ACID2 test, which they weren’t even really very close too, well I guess that depends on who you talk to, but they didn’t support it before so in or to support ACID2 they have to have things like generated content with CSS which we completely don’t have in IE7 they have to have fixed some of there parsing bugs and so on and so forth that hints at a very large change, an even bigger change than that between IE6 and IE7, but we don’t know at this stage, it could be, and this has been one of my objects to ACID2 or one of my discomforts with ACID2 over the years, it could be that they’ve just implemented exactly the things that were needed to ACID2 work and not more, which is the wrong way to go about supporting ACID2 and I don’t know that they’ve done that, but it’s possible. So I may be that it’s not such a huge change, but those things came about as sort of a broader push towards implementing more advanced selectors and fixing bugs and implementing area content and really pushing into the areas of CSS2 that they don’t support and the areas of advanced CSS modules that they don’t support yet, then that could be an enormous change and in that case there’s more chance of them breaking a ton of sites if they don’t have a mechanism like this in place to deal with them.

Paul: So I mean in some senses, after discussing this for however long we’ve been discussing it, there’s very little at this stage that we can really do about this, for the average web designer, Internet Explorer 8 isn’t going to be out in the immediate, one presumes and even when it does we’re talking about relatively minor changes that they’re going to have to make to their site, I guess the biggest immediate concern is maybe how you think about building sites at the moment, do you worry so much about things like progressive enhancement if maybe the way that Internet Explorer works in the future, I guess they’re still good principles.

Eric: Yes, absolutely they’re still good principles and that is how I have developed sites and will continue to develop sites and really I think what it comes down to here is who’s going to have to add the meta tag.

Paul: Yeah.

Eric: Is it going to be people who do forward development, ya know forward compatible development, is it going to be standards aware developers or is it going to be people who aren’t in that sort of craft. It’s not fair in a way, that the people who have been doing things in the right way will have to take that on, but on the other hand it could well if you look at the numbers, there are a lot less of us.

Paul: And in some ways we’re much more equipped to do it.

Eric: Right, to understand why it’s needed and how to do it the right way and when not to do it for that matter.

Paul: Yeah.

Eric: Because when you develop a site for someone and it seems like a one off and they really not going to be keeping it up, you might want to keep the meta tag off because you know that that will default to IE7 and that’s what you want or you might explicitly include it because you want it to default to IE7 and IE8 or ya know on my site if this happens I’ll probably use the edge keyword of IE equals 1024.

Paul: Yeah.

Eric: So I’ll always get the latest and greatest and so that’s for me personally, but for a client I would have a much harder time justifying that because clients don’t care if it’s forward compatible development or not they just care about whether their site works and will continue to work right and so the point has been made, as you did, that in a lot of ways people who are sort of more clued in are better equipped to take this on as opposed to somebody’s grandmother who uses Dreamweaver or whatever to put together a site for her poetry circle and this happens all the time, they don’t even look at the mark-up let alone would understand why this would need to be done why there would need to be some kind of meta tag, first you would need to explain the concept of tags etc, etc, etc.

Paul: I mean a lot of these people don’t even realise that there are multiple versions of a browser, or indeed that there are multiple browsers.

Eric: *laughs* And those are also issues that will need to be faced, somebody is going to have to do this. A lot of these advances that IE8 seems to have ready to go as indicated by passing the ACID2 test may well have to come back out.

Paul: Yeah.

Eric: You can always back changes out of a code base and that really seems to me to be the dilemma and I’ll want to say again, there are people who reject that as being the choice, there are people who feel very strongly that that isn’t in fact a choice, even if you except that’s a choice that they should keep the changes in but be willing to break sites because sites always have to be updated anyway and that’s how browsers have always done it, so there’s a large amount of history that says that can happen but browsers can still advance.

Paul: We will see won’t we, that’s what it boils down to. We will have to wait and see. Okay, Eric, thank you so much for coming on the show and talking that through, it’s an interesting area and I think it’s an area that will have significant impact on how things develop in the future, so it’s good to have your perspective on it. Thanks very much.

Eric: Paul, thanks for having me on, I really appreciate it.

Listeners email:

Basic CMS options

As in last week’s show I so badly bastardised the name of our textmate reviewer, I decided it is only fair to allow him another go this week. He asks:

I have a friend who wants me to build a website that they can update. They don’t know how to write HTML or CSS. What is the best way to solve this problem?

The obvious solution is to use a content management system of some type. Indeed this is something we have covered before on the show back in show 24. If you were building a relatively big site that needs constant updating, then I would definitely encourage you to check out that episode. However if your needs are simpler a full blown CMS might be overkill. In such situations you should consider a simple blogging system like WordPress.

One final option maybe to use a tool like Contribute. That way you could build a nice simple static site but your friend would have a WYSIWYG tool to edit it.

The importance of blogs

Our second question is from Lauren:

My question is about starting a blog. Right now, my nights are filled with homework, but once I complete my program, I can truly dedicate my time to building my portfolio. Are blogs really that important now? I don’t know if I can come up with meaningful content to make my blog stand out. Does this mean that I won’t be able to find a good job in the industry without one?

You talk about a portfolio and blog as if they are separate things, but I would suggest they should be combined. As somebody who regularly hires web designers, I have to say I find portfolio websites frustrating. At worst they show me some pretty pictures, at best examples of fully functional websites. However, what they don’t tell me is the thought process behind the designs. Why did you choose the colors you did? Who is the target audience and how did this affect the design?

A blog can also be used as a portfolio but allows more depth into the designs you are presenting. Also, a blog allows you to link to other content on the web and express your views on that content. This shows me as a potential employer that you are well read and interested in what is out there.

As a student looking for your first job I wouldn’t expect your blog to include new CSS techniques or innovative approaches to user testing. However, I would like to see examples of work fully explained and evidence that you are reading other web design sites and have opinions on what you are reading.

109. Rissington?

Posted in Classic shows on January 28, 2008 by Paul Boag

On Show 109. IE8 divides the web design community, Anton Peck talks about imagery, and the Rissington Podcast crew stand in for Marcus.

Download this show.

Launch our podcast player

News and events | Anton Peck on imagery | Listener emails

Unfortunately Marcus is not yet back on active duty but does thank you all for your kind support. However, do not fret. You do not have to endure another show of me waffling on by myself. Stepping into Marcus’ still warm shoes are two giants in the world of web design and podcasting. From the infamous Rissington Podcast we have Jon Hicks and John Oxton.

News and events

Microsoft to automatically roll out IE7

First up I was sent an article by several listeners which seems to indicate Microsoft is intending to do an auto-update of Internet explorer on the 12th February.

When IE7 was initially released Microsoft made the decision to make the upgrade to their latest browser optional. So even though a user had requested automatic updates they would not receive IE7 unless they specifically approved it. This decision not to force users to update frustrated those in the web design community who wanted to wave goodbye to the evils of IE6.

However, it would now appear Microsoft has decided to take the plunge and will be rolling out IE7 as part of the automatic update. Not all users are signed up to receive these updates but those who are will be using IE7 from February 12th (if they are not already).

Expect to see a significant decline in IE6 users to your site very soon. Perhaps it will not be long before IE6 follows IE5.

IE8 divides the standards community

Talking of Microsoft and Internet Explorer, probably the biggest story of the week is Microsoft’s plans for IE8.

IE8 promises to be a huge step forward in standards support and has been significantly rebuilt in order to enable this. However, such dramatic changes in their rendering engine comes at a cost. They fear that by becoming more standards compliant they will break many websites which are not built with standards in mind.

The way they have dealt with this problem is to introduce a small piece of code that you drop into your pages which can be used to specify what version of IE your site is designed to work with. The browser then renders the webpage as if it was that version of the browser. So for example you could specify that a page was designed for IE7 and a person viewing the page in IE8 would see the page as if it was rendered in IE7.

If no browser is specified then it defaults to rendering the page in IE7 that way no matter what changes Microsoft make in future browsers legacy sites are still rendered correctly.

What on the face of it seems like a very sensible plan has caused uproar in the web design community. A List Apart and Eric Meyer seem to be generally supporting the principle while many others including the likes of Jeremy Keith strongly object.

One of the main sticking point seems to be that this approach breaks progressive enhancement. In other words I may choose to implement a piece of functionality on my site knowing that it wont currently work in IE7 but does work in other more compliant browsers such as Firefox. If i don’t add this special code when IE8 comes along it will look at my page see the code is absent and so render it as IE7. That means even if IE8 supports the functionality now it wont use it because it is rendering my site as IE7.

Its a complex issue with good arguments on both sides. In next week’s show Eric Meyer and myself will discuss it in more depth.

HTML 5 is coming

Still on the subject of the future of web design we now turn to HTML 5 which has just been released in draft format. Sitepoint provides a nice little summary of what is in and what’s out. There is also a summary of the differences between HTML 4 and 5 which is very useful as well.

I cannot claim to have read the entire specification yet but I have to say what I have seen contains some exciting stuff. Having HTML tags to define common areas like headers, footers and navigation offers some interesting possibilities and its good to see built in support for video and audio.

The big shame is that practical application of this is still a long way off but its nice to know that there is potential there.

Career advice for web designers

Of course all these upcoming technologies wont matter to you if my predications of a couple of weeks ago come true and we all find ourselves without a job! This week I was pleased to discover I was not the only one with a pessimistic attitude towards the coming year. Robert Scoble has posted a entry entitled “what to do if you are laid off in 2008 recession“, which I thought was a particularly cheery title.

Actually it is a really good post with some excellent advice. What I like most about it is that the advice applies as much to a student trying to break into web design for the first time as it does to a out of work professional.

In fact if you are considering a career change of any kind (or have had one forced upon you) then this is a good read.

Advice includes…

Spend at least 30% of your day job hunting
Start a blog
Share your knowledge with the world
Demonstrate your skills on youtube
Networking
Contact web start ups because they are hiring.
Volunteer
Prioritise friends and family

The list goes on and is definitely worth reading.

Expert interview: Anton Peck on imagery

Paul: So joining me today, as I said at the start of the show, is Anton Peck. How are you Anton?

Anton Peck: I’m doing great Paul. Thank you.

Paul: It’s good to have you on the show.

Anton Peck: I know. It’s about time isn’t it? *laughs*

Paul: It seems like it’s been a while. We haven’t actually had you on BoagWorld before have we?

Anton Peck: No, no. This is the first time.

Paul: But I’ve known you from… Where did we first meet? Was it South By Southwest?

Anton Peck: Yeah. I think we had sorta done virtual communication before then through email, IM or whatever. But we actually first met at South By Southwest last time.

Paul: Cool. So Anton, tell me and the listeners a little bit about yourself. How do you describe yourself? Do you primarily describe yourself as a web designer or an illustrator?

Anton Peck: That’s a tough call. The illustration is more my fancy, my hobby. It’s where my passion lies but the design is what I’ve been doing for a long time. So it’s sort of my trade of skill.

Paul: I see. So you’re kind of torn between two worlds.

Anton Peck: A little bit.

Paul: But fortunately those two worlds do overlap quite a lot which is why we have you on the show today. We thought it would be good to get Anton in really not to just talk about illustration but to talk about imagery on the web generally as that’s kind of his thing really, amongst many others, because you have a growing reputation. You do art-casts don’t you which are like illustration tutorials? Is that a good way to describe them?

Anton Peck: Yeah, that’s probably a good way to describe them. That is the rumor that I do those isn’t it. I don’t do them as often as I should but I do manage to get them out every once in a while.

Paul: And they are excellent. I have to say, I really do enjoy watching them. So let’s talk a little about imagery on websites and the use of imagery on websites. Let’s start off with a really nebulous and broad question that I guess is pretty impossible to answer but I’m going to ask anyway, which is what makes good imagery for a website? How do you go about picking imagery for a website?

Anton Peck: Well there’s a few things and some of them might seem obvious. First of all the images should complement the content of the website so that the substance isn’t too diluted from its original intent. I know that might seem kinda out there and obvious but it’s probably disappointing and surprising that there’s a lot of website owners that would want to put an image on a website because it’s really pretty or cool.

Paul: I guess it’s important to have imagery that relates to the branding or message you are trying to communicate.

Anton Peck: Right because imagery is meant to support the content rather than take away from it. You don’t want to pull everybody’s focus right away to the images but at the same time you want to support what’s already there. The images should have some interesting quality about them which could mean how well they have been cropped or resized. They should be saved at a pretty decent quality if they are JPEG’s or GIF’s. Not over compressed as they can sometimes diminish the personality of the website. When you go to a website and you see that it’s over compressed it really doesn’t look very good.

Paul: So for a relative newbie, an amateur that’s getting into web design, there’s always this question of GIF vs. JPEG. What do you use and when?

Anton Peck: Well for photographic style images that have a lot of… I would say colours but that’s not quite accurate but more photographic style images I would use JPEG’s. Then for images like logos, things that seem very flat and have a limited palette, maybe go with the GIF’s. Although I tend to do that a little bit less now that PNG’s are finding a little bit more broad support among browsers.

Paul: So do you use PNG’s very much?

Anton Peck: Every so often. They compress nicely especially when you use the adaptive palette which is similar to a GIF format but they can actually get a little bit smaller.

Paul: Cool, yeah. That’s been my experience as well.

Anton Peck: It just gets a little tricky when you are trying to do transparency.

Paul: Yes, exactly.

Anton Peck: That’s a whole other discussion.

Paul: Yeah, I don’t think I’m going to open that can of worms today. So any other tips for selecting good imagery?

Anton Peck: Well I would say it’s got to be appropriate and tasteful of course. So that way you can minimise the risk of offending someone or losing possible business. If you might have a certain sense of humour and want to put something on your website, you might have to watch out for how that might appear to someone else.

Paul: And I guess cultural considerations come in there as well. It’s easy to forget that the worldwide web is worldwide.

Anton Peck: Definitely.

Paul: The next big issue that a lot of people face is this whole kind of stock imagery kind of question. You reach a point where your website’s becoming relatively important to your business or you’re a web designer that’s working for certain clients. At what stage do you say that actually stock imagery isn’t the way to go, perhaps I should be getting something specifically commissioned whether that be commissioned illustrations, commission photography or whatever. It’s a difficult line. What’s your opinion on stock imagery? Is it the devil’s spawn or does it have a place? What do you think?

Anton Peck: No, I think it definitely has a place. It offers a great solution for those trying to find a good quality image when they can’t afford a commissioned photograph.

Paul: So what kinds of site do you use for stock imagery?

Anton Peck: I’ve been a fan of Crestock.com lately.

Paul: Ooo! I haven’t heard of that one.

Anton Peck: Yes and actually they have this huge contest going on where you can win a Mac Pro and all kinds of equipment. It’s a Photoshop contest and I happen to be one of the few judges on that particular site.

Paul: Ahh. So what’s this website again?

Anton Peck: It’s Crestock.com.

Paul: OK. I’ll check that out. Sounds good. So does that do both illustration and photography or…

Anton Peck: Yeah. They have a wide range of different material. They have background textures and you can search for pretty much anything there. A lot of it is user supported so if you even feel that you are a good photographer you can submit your work and see if you can even sell it and make a little bit of money off of it.

Paul: Oh cool. So when selecting stock photography, what should you look for? What should you avoid? The trouble with stock photography is a lot of it can look really similar to one another. What advice would you give about selecting stock imagery?

Anton Peck: Well there’s no real secret to it. There’s not a lot of advice either other than just go through a lot of it. Don’t try to find the very first searches you come across as that would be a higher chance it would be used somewhere else. You want to get a unique image, something that’s probably not as commonly found. It’s always a little disconcerting when you come across a new image that you see on 13 different sites like, “Oh that’s the same image used there”.

Paul: Yeah. It becomes obvious that it’s stock imagery.

Anton Peck: Right. So you want to find that unique image.

Paul: Yeah, couldn’t agree more.

Anton Peck: And the only way to find the perfect, unique image is to just go through a lot of it.

Paul: Yes! Which does take time doesn’t it.

Anton Peck: Certainly.

Paul: When it comes to commissioning stuff is there any particular advice you would give there in regards to briefing the photographer or the illustrator? I mean when somebody commissions you to do a piece of work, what kind of information are you after from them?

Anton Peck: Since they would commission me as an illustrator rather than an actual photographer, I’d mainly look at what they are trying to achieve for their website and how they expect it to support what they’ve done. One of the things that I was gong to talk about for commission photography, even though I’m not one, was the benefits for the websites because you can have a one of a kind image that fits exactly what is needed for the page. A photographer can come out to the business and take photos of the staff and location which is obviously something you can’t do with stock photos.

Paul: Yeah, which obviously makes a huge difference. I think often at times people actually want to see that kind of stuff because on the web you’ve got no way of judging what the company behind the website is really like. So to be able to see real imagery of real people and real locations does add some credibility and trustworthiness to a company. It’s not just somebody working out their back bedroom or whatever.

Anton Peck: Exactly what I was thinking, yes.

Paul: OK so you have a budget. How much difference does it make actually commissioning imagery rather than getting stock imagery. Is there really a difference? Is it really worth going out and getting stuff specifically commissioned?

Anton Peck: I would say if you are looking to get high exposure and if you were a big enough business I would definitely say do it.

Paul: So why is that? What difference does it make?

Anton Peck: Well that’s exactly what I mentioned earlier. It’s the one image that you are going to own or the website is going to own and it’s not going to be found anywhere else. Completely unique.

Paul: You do feel that when you go through these thousands and thousands of stock images that “Well, it’s pretty much unique. Who else is going to use it?” but it’s amazing how often images turn up. I’ve got a little program that changes my desktop image on a regular basis and I’ve had this really nice one that I loved and kept for a while which was a cityscape of London that had been made all futuristic and I thought “Wow! What a great image”. And then I’m going on the tube and there’s the same image plastered across the wall. It’s amazing how often they do turn up again.

Anton Peck: Yeah it’s takes away a little bit doesn’t it?

Paul: Yeah definitely. Definitely. You’re an illustrator, let’s get onto the role of illustration. What advances or disadvantages do you think that illustration has over photography. When should you be using photography, when should you be using illustration?

Anton Peck: Illustration’s gonna provide a whole different type of personality to a website that you can never find in a photo. You can create situations, objects, environments that would either be too expensive to reproduce or they just don’t exist in the real world. Things that you just can’t do with a photograph. Again, that’s going to have to be through the interview of the illustrator trying to describe whether the job is appropriate or not. Actually that would be up to the art director trying to commission to decide whether they need an illustrator or a photographer. But custom website illustrations are so unique right now. When you do have a custom illustration it stands out a great deal more than a photograph. I think one of the greatest examples that stands out on the top of my mind would be Andy Clark’s website with Kevin Cornell’s image that he did of that scooterboy, the guy on the scooter.

Paul: Yeah, it looks superb. That’s stuffandnonense.com, if I remember.

Anton Peck: .co.uk

Paul: Oh .co.uk. Well check that out.

Anton Peck: Just try to imagine if Andy would have reproduced that with a photograph. It wouldn’t have the same personality I don’t think. He wouldn’t have been able to pull it off.

Paul: So do you think that photography has less personality generally or is it just the stock photography that has less personality?

Anton Peck: I wouldn’t call it a more or less personality thing as much it would be a different type of personality. It depends on what you’ve going for.

Paul: Do you think there’s some situations where illustration just isn’t appropriate because it would create the wrong kind of personality or is illustration flexible enough to be able to work in most situations?

Anton Peck: No I think illustration is not appropriate for everything. I think there’s probably a time and a place where an illustration is not going to do the job of a photograph. The photograph tends to look a little bit more… I was going to say professional but I don’t think that’s the word for it. There’s a sort of business approach… I don’t know. Illustration is very personal. It’s one of a kind. It seems that if you have a corporation maybe an illustration isn’t going to work unless it’s a certain kind of illustration.

Paul: Yeah I kind of know what you mean. There’s something… A photograph has a kind of… trustworthiness isn’t the right word but a realism to it perhaps that lends itself to certain circumstances.

Anton Peck: Definitely. It’s really hard to distinguish between the two. It would really boil down to the specific case that it was going to be used.

Paul: Tell us a little bit about some of the different types of illustration and why you would pick when. Obviously every kind of illustrator has very different styles but are they any kinds of broad categories you would recommend in certain circumstances?

Anton Peck: Well, let me think off the top of my head. It seems like you have a real nice vector, flowery styles with flat colours like Veerle. Her work is fabulous and it’s all Illustrator. Her style is just so unique. Then I think of Kevin Cornell. His style is so organic and painted. Then there’s styles like my own. I tend to learn for more photorealism in some cases. My own personal gallery doesn’t lean that way too much. There’s a few different styles out there and it’s hard to say when it’s going to be used properly.

Paul: Do you think that some styles date more quickly than others? You talked about that flowery style where you see a lot of art deco type shapes being used on the web at the moment. Do you think that illustration goes through more fashion trends than photograph does?

Anton Peck: I would venture to say yes and in a way. However like all fashion trends, it always comes back. Right now the big popular thing is artwork that looks like it’s straight from the 70′s. The muted brown colours and the nice organic curves, swirls and circles, things like that. Those are going over quite well I think.

Paul: It’s interesting isn’t it. I think there some sites that need to be fashion conscious and on the cutting edge of what’s going on and there are others that need to be generic and long lasting. It very depends on what kind of industry you are in as whether you should follow these trends or not I guess.

Anton Peck: Right. Or then if it seems to expire then you can just change it out and get a new one.

Paul: The glory of CSS, the separation of content from design.

Anton Peck: Absolutely.

Paul: OK Anton. Thank you very much for coming on the show. It’s really interesting that we haven’t tackled the discussion of imagery before.

Anton Peck: I did have one real quick public service announce if you’ll let me have another minute.

Paul: Yeah, go for it.

Anton Peck: For your listeners I’m wanted to just bring up that they shouldn’t take images, and I know it’s kind of obvious, take images from fountain sites or Flickr or Google Image search. That’s just bad practice and they are normally just going to get found out and it’s not a very nice thing to do. If they find images on sites that they like, they can contact the owner to obtain permission.

Paul: And it’s surprising. Often the owners are very happy and flexible to accommodate that. If you take the time to contact them they are often very flattered that you asked. Good piece of advice. OK thank you very much Anton and we’ll get you back on the show again in the future. Good to talk to you.

Listeners email:

Textmate reviewed

Teifion shares his thoughts on Textmate for the mac, an incredibly powerful text editor with a sophisticated plug-in architecture.

I have to confess that I have only opened Textmate once and found myself unsure where to begin. I do know however that Teifion and many other web developers rate it extremely highly and use it as their primary development tool. In the show I pick Mr Hicks and Oxton’s collective brains about its benefits and whether I should make the effort to learn it properly.

Javascript or JQuery

The second listener contribution comes from Will who writes…

I was listening to your last one and you said it would be important to learn javascript for 2008. I know bits of javascript but don’t particularly like it and don’t know ajax yet, however, I have been playing with jQuery and find it much simpler. Do you think it’s a good alternative to learning all of javascript and have you used it at all?

Personally I think it is important to learn a language from scratch and that relying too heavily on libraries can cause problems in the long run. Although there is nothing wrong with you learning jQuery I would suggest it should be an addition to learning Javascript rather than a replacement.

If you want to know if Mr Oxton and Hicks disagree with me you will have to listen to the show :)

To leave an audio comment for the show skype “boagworldshow” or call +44 20 8133 5122.

108. Future of

Posted in Classic shows on January 23, 2008 by Paul Boag

On show 108: The differences between work for an agency or being an in-house designer. Hosting bandwidth intensive content and what happens when Paul designs a web design conference.

Podcast: Download (22.7MB)

Download this show.

Launch our podcast player

News and events | Daniel Burka and Leslie Chicoine | Listener emails

Unfortunately Marcus is not on this week’s show. His Father died a few days ago and obviously he has lots of stuff to deal with. Hopefully he will be back next week. However, if you are desperate for your Marcus fix then check him out on Nevermind the Buzzcocks.

News and events

Future of Web Design

Imagine for a moment if you will that an email lands in your inbox asking you to create your perfect web design conference. Who would you invite to speak? Daniel Burka from Digg, Andy Clarke maybe? What about Jon Hicks or Jina Bolton?

Well that is exactly what happened to me when the guys over at Carsonified asked me to chair this years Future of Web Design conference. They asked me who I thought my dream line up would be and together we worked on assembling them. Sure, there were some restrictions, apparently raising the dead caused a problem and hosting the conference on the moon was out of the question. However, overall we did pretty damn well.

So on the 17th and 18th of April in London I get to attend (and contribute to) my dream conference. The line up includes all the people I have already mentioned and more. The only thing missing is you guys. It would be really cool to have a bit of a boagworld meet-up while we are there so get on over and sign up today. It will cost you £145 including VAT or £480 if you want to attend my workshop as well.

However I know some of you are poor students or have tight ass bosses so we are also giving away two free tickets. If you want to win the two tickets email me with FOWD in the subject line with your name and contact details. We will pick a winner in a couple of weeks.

Advancing advanced search

My second story of the day is an excellent post on the Boxes and Arrows website. It tackles the subject of advanced search. Search generally is possibly one of the most neglected aspects of website navigation. This is amazing as it is the primary means of navigation for 50% of those who use websites.

I have seen some stuff written about search results but next to nothing on advanced search. What is more advanced search is not only ignored by writers but also by users. Few choose to use the functionality it provides, only turning to it as a last resort if all else fails.

In this article Stephen Turbek suggests that we need to re-design advanced search from the ground up. Instead of advanced search being a tiny link often overlooked, it should be an integral part of the search results page where complex filtering can be carried out through a graphical interface. Its hard to explain exactly what he is talking about without seeing the examples he gives so definitely check out the post.

If you ever have to work with search then this is a must read.

Starting from a blank canvas

Next up is a blog post from Cameron Moll on how to start a new design. We have spoken before on this show about how hard it is to come up with a design from scratch. Nothing can sap your creativity more than a blank sheet of paper (or empty Photoshop file!).

Cameron gives some good solid advice including sketching rather than diving into Photoshop and also drawing from previous work. However, he also suggests some less well known approaches such as starting with a grid and (most interestingly) working on the core content first. On the latter point he is referring to the fact that we often tackle things like headers and navigation first only coming back to the content at the end. Moll suggests this should be the other way around. This is good advice as it focuses the designer on what the site is really about rather than the interface used to navigate it.

You suck at Photoshop

My last find of the week is a really superb set of tutorials I found on youtube. I am not entirely sure how useful they are but they are definitely entertaining.

Most screencasts maybe informative but are often deadly boring. Not so with “You suck at Photoshop”. These basic Photoshop tutorials have a twist as the person recording the screencasts vents his rage at a cheating wife. Check out the video below and you will see what I mean.

Expert interview: Daniel Burka and Leslie Chicoine

Paul: OK so joining me today is Daniel Burka from digg.com, hello Daniel.

Daniel: Hello Paul.

Paul: Nice to have you on the show again, it’s been a while.

Daniel: Well thanks for having me again.

Paul: We’ve also got Leslie Chicoine joining us as well from satisfaction what’s the url again, remind me.

Leslie: Sure it’s getsatisfaction.com.

Paul: getsatisfaction, that’s the bit I was missing, I should have been prepared and had that on my screen, but there you go I’m badly organised. And of course how can we do an interview without having Marcus here as well, hello Marcus.

Marcus: Hi Paul.

Paul: laughs

Marcus: getsatisfaction.com, you must be able to sell that for millions to a porn agency.

Paul: laughs

Marcus: laughs Sorry, I’m off on one already.

Leslie: I’ve heard those jokes so many times.

Marcus: Yeah, ok, I’m so predictable.

Leslie: laughs

Marcus: I always have to ask people from America were are you and what’s the weather like? I know it’s a really boring English thing to say but it really is horrible over here at the moment.

Leslie: Well we’re in sunny San Francisco, I think the weather about 55 Fahrenheit right now.

Paul: Yeah, that’s so unfair isn’t it? Why do we live here, I just don’t know why we continue to live in Britain in winter.

Daniel: I was just in Canada last week and it was like 20 below freezing so it’s really nice to be back.

Paul: I bet laughs

Marcus: Not that cold here that’s for sure, it’s just wet, it rains all the time in the winter.

Paul: So Daniel, I’m dragging it back to the subject now Marcus if you hadn’t actually noticed while you go off on weird tangents that’s fine. Daniel we’ve had you on the show before and so hopefully our listens will be familiar with your background and if they haven’t heard of digg.com they should be ashamed of themselves. Leslie your new to the boagworld podcast so maybe should kick off with you, and if you could just tell us a little bit about getsatisfaction and a little bit about yourself and your own background if you would.

Leslie: Sure, well let’s start with getsatisfaction, basically I’m trying to re-do what customer service is there’s a lot of depressions happening on line about companies and how companies aren’t getting involved so we’re trying to get companies and customers together in the same space. Talking about products and issues and ideas for the future and yet we’re also trying to make sure it’s a level playing field so that neither side has control of the conversation so we’re acting as an intermediary allowing true conversations that are open to the public and that everyone can see and anybody can get involved in, but we’ve actually got people talking about customer service for companies, the companies aren’t there yet but getsatifcation.com/apple is a very popular section and there’s nobody from apple on the site yet. But there are also sections like the one for google and the one for twitter and we have google employees and twitter employees involved. It’s a very different take on customer service because it’s not just customer service rep it’s people who are programming, people who are designing, people who are in the HR department, all getting involved and having much more direct contact with customers

Paul: So do the companies all have to pay in order to participate in this or is this a free service? How does this work, what’s your business model?

Leslie: Well, all the features we have right now are free; our business model is still being developed, not to say that we don’t have one, we just have a lot of different directions and we want to make sure that whatever direction we take fits them in our philosophies, but we’re hoping that in the future for us, we see the potential in the analytics and the data that we collect. Your on the site are your telling us a lot about the different products and the services that your using and can tell companies to make connections between what products you use and like, and what other products and service you might also be interested in.

Paul: Yeah, of course.

Leslie: We start collecting more information about who you are and why your there in the first place.

Paul: Well I guess the other great thing, if you thinking of building a web app of any description then this is a great mechanism that already exists to handle the customer services enquiries you get without having to build all the functionality that is needed to do that as well so I imagine your attracting a lot of smaller companies as well?

Leslie: Yeah, it’s actually been a really interesting display, we’ve got small web apps, we have larger web apps such as google, digg.

Daniel: Even pounce is on there, I mean when we set up pounce originally and we wanted a way to communicate with our users and we immediately just set up a satisfaction page, signed up and it’s been great for use.

Paul: Yeah.

Leslie: Yeah, that’s all pretty easy, another thing actually too I forgot to mention, what’s truly great about the service is often times there customer service issues that span multiple companies so a great example was a guy who was having trouble getting a refund on an airplane ticket and he wasn’t sure if it was American Airlines or expedia.com so through the site he was able to post the issue to both sides and have them both look at it and communicate together there.

Paul: Personally Leslie what is it you do at satisfaction?

Leslie: Sure, I’m a designer, kind of an open title primarily I do a lot of UI design, I do a fair amount of contact development, I actually design a little bit of the business strategy as well we have developers who actually do the coding but most of what I do is wire framing.

Paul: Oh.

Leslie: My background though is actually game design.

Paul: Really?

Leslie: Really. laughs

Paul: So, that seems an interesting leap to go from game design into kind of a web app like this. Is it a big difference?

Leslie: It’s not really, because so much of what I learned in games design was how you design mechanics that let you create particular types of dynamics so you want people to act a certain way or, well in our case we want people to have a really positive attitude and there’s actually things in the design that makes people happier and make the conversation more open and positive, everything from the wording that we use to how we break down the steps, try and keep it all simple, if you go to the site you’ll notice it’s all very white and clean and light and that again add to that kind of feel and it helps people be more communicative.

Paul: Hmm… Interesting stuff, so the reason we thought we would setup this call today is really so we could talk a bit, well it was a conversation I had pervious with you wasn’t it Daniel about the fact that you come from an agency background and you used to work for a company, what’s the name of the company again?

Daniel: Silver Orange

Paul: Yes, that was it and they were what you would call a normal web design agency and while you were doing that digg was one of your clients is that correct?

Daniel: Yeah, so I helped found Silver Orange there were six of us what started the company back in 99 I think, but yeah we were a pretty typical boutique web job.

Paul: And what interested me about the conversation we were having previously, was the way you kind of when from working at Silver Orange across then to working for digg so you’ve kind of gone from working at an external agency were you had lots of clients and that kind of stuff, to working as an in house designer on a single project and I thought that was quite an interesting discuss and quite an interesting area to cover and you mentioned Leslie to me, and that you’d been having a similar conversation in a coffee shop somewhere with her and we though lets setup a few minutes and have a chat about some of the kind of ramifications of that and I guess the good place to start is, perhaps Daniel that you kick us off, what you see the difference being between working as an in-house designer somewhere and working for an external agency, is there a big difference?

Daniel: Absolutely, I mean it was actually quite interesting, I was back in Canada last week for some awards, kind of a yearly state of the union meeting and I’m still involved with the company a bit, I went back there for that, again this exact same discussion with one of our designers, and he was really jealous that I’m currently re-designing the digg comment system and he thinks it’s really interested that I’ve designed it twice now and I’m coming back again and doing it a third time and that kind of iterative development is something you frequently don’t get to do in the agency environment. That’s one of the real pro’s of working, I think as an in house designer is that you don’t build something and just hand it off you get the chance to build it, received feed back, watch how people use it gage some metrics over time and come back an re-design it and continue to improve something.

Paul: I mean, would you agree with that Leslie? Is that one of the things that attracts you working at satisfaction?

Leslie: Definitely, there’s something about being able to see a project through and then check back on it again and again, but I think that’s one of the things that makes it difficult, you no longer have and perspective, so we’re were talking about, particularly at the coffee shop, when you working at the agency, you come in and what makes you special is your new perspective and when your working at a company, you no longer have that so you need to make sure you can somehow come back fresh to the same project and when you iterating, bringing in new eyes, trying to see what needs to be changed becomes a challenge.

Paul: At one point in the sentence there you said again, and again…

Marcus: laughs

Paul: And I heard Marcus snigger at that, he obviously picked up on that as well. I mean that’s the thing, as somebody who works for an agency I have to confess, I think I would go absolutely crazy working on one website over a long period of time, probably because I’ve got the attention span of a newt, ya know do you ever long for that variety of work to work on?

Daniel: Yeah, absolutely, it’s usually really fun when you’re working for an agency especially clients who give you a lot of leeway and a lot of respect, that you walk through the door and you immediately see 80% of the problems on there site and you say, listen this is what you need to do, this is what you should fix and you get immediate reaction, it’s really fun right?

Paul: agrees

Daniel: You can bring so much change so quickly and somewhere like digg for instance, I mean I only have one or two sections of the site now that I’m looking at were I’m like, ok there’s still huge room for improvement here I know want to kind of tear it down and think of it from scratch and in all the other places there’s kind of refinement, refinement, refinement and it’s way more challenging and that’s what makes it fun but it’s also a bit more tedious, it’s not something fresh.

Marcus: I was gonna ask what the different skills you need, but I think you’ve kind of answered that, maybe being more dog-eared and determined, are there any major different skills between working on multiple projects and working on the same site all the time?

Leslie: Definitely, I think especially when your working at a company verses an agency the projects your working you have to have a better understanding of there application though out the rest of the business so when we’re iterating and we’re working on small details, the changes we make are for business needs or metric things that we’ve gotten so that kind of judgement is not something that I personally had as much experience with when I was working at an agency, and actually the team that works on getsatisfaction was initially a consultancy but it was weird have the whole team have to switch over.

Paul: Oh right.

Leslie: So initially when we were a consultancy the actually people who weren’t really involved with what projects we chose or really even finding out that much about the company, the founders were the one who really had to do that research and now we all have to do that kind of research.

Daniel: I was interesting because I was in a different position at Silver Orange as one of the founders, ya know I did have quite a say on which projects we take especially the UI projects were I was working more solo with a client, ya know, if I didn’t want to take a project we wouldn’t take it, working with clients I kind of got to know there business a lot before I started to get into it, you learn as much as you can, kind of a week or two to get into a project but at somewere like digg or like pownce, it’s a lot more about thinking strategically and thinking much more in the long term because if you pin yourself into a corner it’s literally yourself and you’re the one who’s gonna have to be able to dig yourself out of it later on.

Paul: Do you guys every, digg and getsatisfaction, ever bring in external specialists from time to time?

Leslie: Definitely, we were talking about needing fresh perspective and bringing new people in is always a great way to do that. We occasionally, what we do is we have design sessions and we have guests whom we get their opinions and show them what we’re doing and see if they have new ideas.

Paul: I mean it’s quite interesting that isn’t it because I mean we do a lot of work for a whole variety of different clients and you go to these different companies and they have internal design and development teams and you think why are we actually being brought in here were they’ve got the skills in house but they’re not really utilising what they’ve got and there’s a perception that if you bring in someone from the outside they’ve somehow got more skill than perhaps an in house team, do you feel more or less valued as an in-house employee than you did perhaps externally?

Leslie: laughs You don’t get that same sort of shiny, new feeling as an in-house designer I definitely feel more valued at this point than I did in the consultancy because one of the burdens of getting things right is on my shoulders now. So you really just can’t throw my ideas out the window. But it is actually interesting when people coming into a company, you can see in people’s eyes; they get a little nervous right? That the person coming in is gonna be more valuable than them right?

Paul: Yeah.

Daniel: I’m so excited, I’ve just hired another designer at digg, so there’s three of us now, and he’s awesome and I’m so excited to get someone in here who, a, can code better than me and b, he’s bring an entirely new perspective to the site, so ya know, it’s really nice to have fresh eyes so this is the best of both worlds because a, he’s now an in house designer and b, he’s just joined so he’s like completely fresh too it and I’m gonna capitalise on that as much as I can in the next couple of months before ya know he gets too deep in it a get’s into the aquarium.

Paul: I suppose you haven’t really been doing it that long, being an in-house designer but do you think there’s a point were you have to move no, when you think perhaps you’ve been there too long and been institutionalised into a certain way of thinking?

Daniel: I don’t think so, I mean I know this older guy who used to be the creative designer at apple, and the creative director a Polaroid ya know a bunch of really big companies and he’d been in the same job for a decade I think, but he was able to think incredibly creatively and leverage the people under him too bring the best into projects. I think as long as your able to adapt, I mean you can’t just keep coming through the door and doing the same kind of work all the time, I think your able to adapt to that in-house philosophy, I think you can definitely keep at it.

Leslie: Yeah I don’t have that much experience with that, but I think that’s the way too do it. Even with just the year that I’ve had at satisfaction you find yourself having to play a lot of games or do things to freshen the project or freshen the work.

Daniel: Right. I find too, like at somewhere like digg there’s so many different projects within the whole. It’s not like I’m working on the homepage every single day this year, that’s one very minor part of the site, you break down projects into components, like re-designing the comments is very different to re-designing the user profiles, I see them as very independent projects obviously tied stylistically and ya know from a user interface strand point they’re tied together, but they’re very different challenges which mixes up your job a lot.

Paul: What’s quite interesting with both your experience is that you’ve worked for agencies that worked on these applications your currently full time involved with and you saw that point with digg and satisfaction were you thought, ok, it’s not the right business move to have an external agency now, we need to bring that in house and I’m just kind of quite interested as to what happened in that process and whether you’ve got much of an idea of what that tipping point is, were you go from thinking yeah we can use an external agency for this to a point were we really need to do this in-house?

Leslie: I’ll let Daniel answer that one.

Paul: laughs

Daniel: So for digg it really happened that, originally it was a project Kevin had and was just throwing it around and wanted to see if it would get traction, and when it started to get traction he hired Silver Orange to come in and re-design the interface so it was a lot more usable and the site was gaining momentum gaining momentum and it kind of got to a point were they started thinking ok, this is a serious business, it’s got viability and they decided to start a company around it, in a much more serious and methodical way and that was kind of the point were they decided, ok, one of those positions is gonna be a designer, I’d been coming down, probably once a month down to San Francisco from Toronto and I one point Kevin was like, you should really move here, so he convinced me to move down and even for the first bit it was kind of interesting, I hope a lot of companies can do this kind of thing, it was quite flexible, I was working one week a month on Silver Orange project, so it was good for digg because they didn’t have to pay me as much and at the time there wasn’t enough work for a full time person and that way for me it was a nice period of time because I had the best of both worlds, I’d work on a bunch of client projects one week a month and then long term in house designer three weeks out of the month.

Leslie: It was a totally different situation for getsatisfaction because we had the whole company as a team look for a project to start, so for us it was really letting go of our client work.

Paul: Okay.

Marcus: I bet that’s hard.

Leslie: At satisfaction we let go of most of our development work first and let go of our design work and then turned this completely into satisfaction. But I did have that period like Daniel were I was saying were your working on lots of projects and along side your long term project.

Marcus: I can’t imagine slowly giving up project work; I guess it’s the sales man in me. I find it hard to turn any business away.

Leslie: Yeah, it’s actually very difficult to let people go when they want you and they still need you to do work for them.

Daniel: Silver Orange have actually got an idea for a project and they’re thinking of totally scaling back, and I don’t think, well we’re definitely not gonna drop all client projects but we’re talking about cutting down and a few people on the team, ya know kind of pumping other projects and drawing in other people as they’re required, and I think that’s also an interesting strategy as long as you can be disciplined enough to commit enough time to it.

Leslie: Yeah, I think our team decided up front that there was a stopping point that we would not be disciplined enough and that we would have problem with time being spent on things that were interesting or new instead of the core project.

Paul: I mean we’re looking, ya know we obviously knock around different ideas and web applications, we perceive, are a way of expanding the business rather than necessarily replacing one with the other so well I guess there are lots of different ways of slicing the cake I guess.

Daniel: Yeah, that’s the same philosophy Silver Orange is likely to follow.

Paul: It’s interesting.

Daniel: I mean it’s frustrating when you’re building other peoples projects all the time, you know you’ve got the skills in house to build something awesome, but smart people come up with ideas why should we be building for them when we can do it ourselves. laughs

Paul: Yeah, completely.

Marcus: This is so familiar, we’ve been having, well since day one I guess the simplest example is your own website in an agency, that always gets put to the bottom of the pile and we’ve been thinking about developing different applications for quite a while now but just trying to get people off paid projects and onto that, is, well it’s impossible.

Paul: laughs

Marcus: Well were we’ve got to now is, proper contracts have been written up between two different departs within Headscape if you like so that it is an official project, these set applications we’re working on at the moment.

Paul: When you say it out loud like that Marcus is sounds so pathetic.

Leslie: laughs

Marcus: But it’s true.

Paul: laughs But that’s how we’re getting around the problem. But I’ve got to admire this all or nothing approach or right we’re gonna go for it, but anyway.

Daniel: I think there’s actually something really curious about the bay area, I think it’s really different in attitudes here like ya know, figure out what’s the worst that can happen, ya know and if the worst that can happen means things don’t go so well in 6 months and you can barely pay your rent, if that’s the worst that happens then what ever just go it. And I think that’s why so many projects here get off the ground. I think that’s great. There’s a real sense of optimism here.

Leslie: And a lot of support too, if you’ve got an idea. There’s very few people here who are secretive with there ideas. They’re always talking about all their ideas and sharing and talking about building something rather than trying to hide it.

Daniel: But it’s competitive too. The people here, ya know there’s such a big audience for a lot of these products it’s like why should we quibble over the similarities of our projects lets just find a way that we can do stuff together and throw around ideas and it’s really fun.

Paul: Yeah it’s good. So for a lot of the people that are listening to this show, some of them are students that are coming out of university and are looking for their first movement into the web design world. We’ve got other people that are, what I would call enthusiastic amateurs who are looking to move full time into web design, you’ve got lots of different ways you could go these days if you’ve got web design skills I guess choice number one if you go say go for it I’m gonna build my own web application, choice number two is you could go a join a web agency and work on a variety of third party work and choice number three I guess is to become an in-house designer for a company, whether that be a trendy web 2.0 company or whether it be an in-house designer for I dunno on-line banking or whatever, how do you go about making that decision and what advice would you give people about were to begin? Are you going to damage your career if you start off by working in one place? Should you be doing lots of different types of work, ya know, what’s your advice?

Leslie: I think we both sort of agree that the real thing your looking for is good people, so whichever of those situation gets your around other great designers, other great teams with projects that your excited about, it probably doesn’t matter as much as you might think that it would.

Daniel: Right.

Marcus: It’s a bad question Paul.

Daniel: If I was getting into the industry right now, I wouldn’t want to get into a huge agency were I don’t know what sub-section of that agency I’m going to be in, what team I’m gonna work on, I mean joining a group of less than 15 you can get a good idea of who your actually gonna be working with and that kind of apprenticeship with really brilliant people is easily the best way to advance.

Paul: Yeah, I like that, I like that a lot. I must admit I hadn’t thought of it from that perspective and yes Marcus it was a rubbish question.

Marcus: laughs

Leslie: Well that’s the one that everyone’s asking.

Paul: Well yeah, we get asked that question all the time. My mistake is I should have asked what advice do you have for people starting out in there career, I shouldn’t have constrained you by giving you these different options.

Leslie: I don’t think this is just starting out. This is something your constantly asking yourself, am I in the right spot and I doing the right thing to advance my career, but as for actually starting, once again come back to this all the time, if there are good people around me then I’m in the right spot.

Paul: Yeah.

Leslie: If I’m inspired by the people around me I’m in the right spot.

Paul: I’m gonna have to move Marcus I’m sorry. I work with you…

Daniel: laughs

Leslie: laughs

Paul: laughs He’s used to it, he likes my abuse. laughs

Marcus: I’m also not a designer so.

Paul: No, your not, that’s very true. Although I don’t think I consider myself a designer anymore either.

Marcus: You took the words right out of my mouth Paul. laughs

Paul: I just thought I’d beat you to the punch.

Marcus: You did.

Paul: Okay, thank you guys for coming on the show, that was really, really interesting, you came up with some really good stuff and yeah I’m sure we’ll get some really good stuff back after listening to you. Thank you for coming and we’ll get you on the show again soon.

Marcus: Thank you.

Leslie: Thank you.

Daniel: Thanks a lot Paul.

Listeners email:

The cost of bandwidth

Eric: How do you deal with high bandwidth sites without bankrupting your clients? Is the quality of downloads compromised with these “unlimited bandwidth” sites?

Well Eric I have to confess that I have largely avoided the escalating costs of hosting this podcast thanks to the kind sponsorship of switchpod. However, for those of you who haven’t managed to gain sponsorship or who are looking for solutions for clients then there are numerous options available.

As Eric said in his audio question there is Libsyn which is a well known multimedia hosting provider that has amazingly competitive rates. I am not quite sure why Eric has an issue with them as I have heard very good things about them.

Another option is to host your video or audio with the Internet Archive. This service is free although I hear reports that performance can be an issue.

Of course if you are dealing with video then there are a whole host of possibilities from youtube to viddler. Some services are better than offers so be careful. For example some resize your video or limit the file size and length.

If you are hosting for clients be sure to check the terms and conditions of these sites as some of them preclude their use for this purpose. Also check ownership as you can be signing over the rights to reuse your video to the site owner.

Lastly in response to Eric’s concerns about the download quality of unlimited bandwidth sites, I have to say I have yet to experience any. I can see how this could be a problem when you get to really big numbers but that is not something that has effected me. Sounds to me that Eric might have been talking to companies trying to justify their own inflated prices and limited offers.

Working with audio

Harry: Given that you like to receive questions in audio format, can you, or any other boagers recommend any software that does the job?

We certainly do like receiving audio questions Harry (I notice that yours was an email!) Also now we are doing a listeners email section it is even more important. That is why we have made it even easier. I have signed up for a skypein account which means you can send me a message either by skyping boagworldshow or by calling 020 8133 5122.

However, lets just presume for a moment that you want to record and edit audio for another reason beyond commenting on boagworld. As a web designer or website owner you probably don’t have to do much audio work. As a result you won’t want to shell out a lot of money. I would therefore recommend you check out Audacity. Its a free audio editor for both the mac and PC which is as good as many of the professional packages. It provides all of the basics you need and exports to a number of different formats. Definitely worth trying out.

So now you have no excuse not to send an audio question, comment, or suggestion into the show.

107. Running to keep up

Posted in Classic shows on January 15, 2008 by Paul Boag

On show 107: What should you be learning about in 2008, Jason Beaird on web design basics and how to deal with portfolio pages.

Download this show.

Launch our podcast player

News and events | Where to focus in 08 | Jason Beaird on design basics | Listener emails

News and events

Setting expectations

Our first news story today is an article on working with your clients. Specifically it focuses on the subject of setting your clients expectations and clearly communicating with them.

We all work for somebody. We all have clients in some form. Whether our clients are other companies or simply our boss we all know the feeling when they seem to expect something which we believed we never promised.

This article looks at two ways of managing this kind of scenario. First be diligent up front. As the article says…

Setting expectations isn’t difficult, or mysterious, but it does take time and you have to be diligent about it.

Second it suggests being consistent. That doesn’t mean you are inflexible. It means that you need to be consistent in your communications throughout a project. If goal posts move, it is important that you explain the ramifications.

The principles of this article are universally applicable. So whoever you are take a few minutes to check it out.

Great websites do, not say

The next post I found falls into the category of “it’s funny because it’s true”. It’s a post by one of my favourite bloggers Gerry McGovern who seems to rant against websites that spend more time talking about user experience rather than offering it. He begins his rant by focusing on welcome copy…

I don’t want to pass meaningless pleasantries with your website. I don’t want to shake its hand. Or talk about the weather. I’m at your website for a reason. I’m in a hurry. I’m impatient. So kill the welcome, please.

He goes on to criticise sites that waste valuable copy explaining how easy their sites are…

If it’s really easy, why are you telling me it’s really easy and quick? For starters, you’ve wasted my time by making me read your meaningless sentence.

If you ever write copy for websites then you should read this post. If you don’t then check it out anyway if only for the pure entertainment value.

CSS: The All-Expandable Box

My final suggestion for your reading pleasure is a post on the Web Designers Wall entitled The All-Expandable Box. This solves a problem which I encounter all the time.

As you will know if you listen to this show regularly I am a great fan of using ems for typography. I like the idea users can resize their text to suit their own requirements.

The downside of this approach is that it can quickly break designs especially when text is contained within a box. The box will naturally expand vertically but not horizontally. The result is that you loose control of line length. Enabling the whole interface to expand including the box itself is very useful. This article shows you how.

Its a nice clean technique that should act as a building block for much more complex things. So if you are considering doing more ems based design then this should be a nice starting point.

Feature: Where to focus in 08

As web designers we are all busy people. We are in such a fast moving sector that it can be hard to know what is worthy of our attention. Should we be focusing on Silverlight or brushing up on Javascript? Learning Rails or grappling with mobile devices? This week I want to share my thoughts of where you should be focusing your energies in 2008.

Expert interview: Jason Beaird on design basics

Paul Boag: Joining me today is Jason beard author of an incredibly useful and wonderful book that I’ve really come to love. That’s – How would you describe it? Is it a basic introduction to designing?

Jason Beaird: It’s a basic introduction to graphic design principles. The book was really first intended for web developers in fact the initial working title was web design for developers and it kind of expanded into just a introduction to graphic design principles for anybody not just for developers, not people already creating websites. But anybody interested in design really.

Paul Boag: Mmm what’s so great about it is that you’ve kind of really taken time to go over the basic principle of creating a beautiful website. Which I guess is the title of the book, “The Principles of beautiful of web design” that’s the title isn’t it?

Jason Beaird: That’s correct.

Paul Boag: I really should have it in front of me shouldn’t I [Jason laughs] Oh but you’ve got to be fairly impressed that I knew that of the top of my head.

Jason Beaird: I’m just impressed that you have a copy yourself.

Paul Boag: Well yes I do. And it’s good because a lot of people that listen to this show are not necessarily professional designers we have a lot of people who listen to the show who are website owners but have to do a bit of design in order to maintain their site. We’ve got Developers that developing applications and having to do some design as part of that and we’ve also got people who probably are designers but not full time so are interested in how the professionals go about doing these things. So it’s a really good book for the boagworld listeners and why I’ve been so desperate to get you on the show for so long Jason, so it’s good to have you Jason.

Jason Beaird: So everybody laughs along.

Paul Boag: Well you’re a busy man; you’ve got a lot to do. So I thought what we would basically do is take the chapters from the book and maybe pick out some of the basic principles from each of those chapter and get you to talk about them little bit. So the chapters in your book are layout and composition, colour, texture, typography and imagery and that for a start made me very enthusiastic. Because it’s like really obvious, basic stuff that here are the main issues you are going to come across from a design prospective and you know we’re going to do a chapter on each which I just thought very refreshing and very logical and that’s good. So let’s kick off with layout and composition so tell us a bit about some of the stuff you cover in that chapter maybe and some of the basic principles that non-designers need to know about.

Jason Beaird: Well the entire book is really just basics, in my opinion. It’s just stuff that a lot of people think designers have as intuition and really it’s just stuff you can learn and learning these principle is like learning how to hand code. Really you can a website using a WYSIWYG but understanding the tags and selectors allows you to see inside and know what’s going on. And these are just basic. But really this is going to be the fire hose version of the book.

< p>Paul Boag: Yeah, I’m asking you to compress the entire book into about 20-30 minutes. [Both laugh]

Jason Beaird: I’ll give it a shot. We’ll start out with layout, some of the main principles of graphic design theory is balance, unity and emphasis and learning how to take all three of those and use them effectively in a layout is a pretty good place to start, from a layout prospective. By balance I mean symmetry. Is it divided right down the middle, or does it still feel balanced even though it’s divided into columns? By unity I mean do the elements of the website feel like they are one cohesive thing. You know does it feel like it’s a singular unit rather than a bunch of different bits. Then emphasis obviously is about creating a focal point on the page. And keeping that focal point and understanding where people are going to look and why they are going to look there and so there there’s different ways to create all three of those things. One thing I talked about in the first chapter about balance and creating balance is design proportion which some people call the golden mean or the golden ratio. Really it’s just a rule that if you divide a width by 1.62 just a number called Phi** you get a pleasing proportionate division. And so to make that simpler it can also be known as the rule of thirds. If you divide something by thirds it’s pretty close to the 1/ 1.62 ratio and you can come up with a pleasing kind of division for a navigation column and content area by using that kind of division. But really that’s sort of an overview.

< p>Paul Boag: Yeah, I wonder why the rule of thirds works, did you find out anything in your research about why that is pleasing?

Jason Beaird: I didn’t really find out a whole lot of solid information about it. But there is some out there, pythagorans noticed that it was a very common division in nature things like with leaves and shells had the same division and ratio and then started to develop the concept that anything designed around that is designing around nature so is therefore designing around gods design so you know. So the Romans and the Greeks built there some of their architecture on the golden ratio, the golden mean it’s a stable of graphic design since those times.

Paul Boag: Yeah and it really does work. I remember even back in Art College when I was being taught photography the same principles apply to photography composition you know or really anything you do, whether its print design or web design. So yeah the rule of thirds I think is a good one to take away.

Jason Beaird: Yep.

Paul Boag: Ok, what about colour tells us a little bit about colour because that’s a huge subject that people have written entire books on and you had one chapter so what did you chose to pick out on the subject of colour?

Jason Beaird: That’s the important thing to remember about these chapters is that there are entire books dedicated to each. I feel like was already trying to squeeze it already into the book. But with colour I think the most important thing to remember is that people’s perception of colour depend on their own personal experiences and cultural like right now, red and green means Christmas, for most Americans and most people around the globe whether they believe in that or not it’s just something that we’ve been exposed to so much that that’s the way we see it.

Paul Boag: Yeah.

Jason Beaird: But beyond those personal perceptions and traditional perceptions it’s good to know that there are ways to align colours where you really can’t make too big a mistake. [Laughs] and that are using a colour wheel and to rely on colour schemes that exist. With any rule it can be broken for whatever purpose you want but it’s good to know what the good colour choices look like before you start making your own and relying on color schemes or a colour wheel is a good way to get started.

Paul Boag: I think when you talk about these rules exist to be broken, ok that’s true but the kind of audience you are trying to reach, maybe a non-designer audience kind of playing safe is kind of always a good way to go.

Jason Beaird: That’s true.

Paul Boag: And you know using a colour wheels and stuff. Don’t you also mention in the book about finding a photograph that you like and or is that somewhere else, that might be somewhere else but it’s a nice idea anyway, taking a photograph and extracting the colours from that. I think is quite a nice way of doing it as well. Have you ever tried that?

Jason Beaird:I have tried that, I use that quite often. I don’t know if I mentioned that in the book or not. I mention a few other software based colour chooses and one that come out around the time I was writing the book that I didn’t get a chance to include was adobe kuler, at

Paul Boag: Yeah I think using a tool like that is very handy indeed. Because let’s face it we perceive colour in slightly different ways and what is it one in ten or is it one in 20 men are colour blind anyway.

Jason Beaird: I believe it’s 1 in 10 have slight colour blindness where they can’t tell, usually a red green; where they can’t tell the difference between red and green. Yeah so I mean yes, using a tool is a good idea if you are not a designer who’s really confident in colour.

Paul Boag: Now what about the subject of texture that was an interesting one I was quite interested that that was included in the chapter listings. And I, I intuitively do stuff with texture but I’ve never really thought about it that much so tell us a little bit about why you decided to include that and what advice would you give?

Jason Beaird: That for me was probably one of the hardest chapters to write because it was a lot of intuition and I like to use texture a lot in my own designs and I think that where truly the design begins. But there is not much principle wise to it. You can talk about points and lines and shape and that’s where all visual effects begin. But texture is really about creating a tactile quality and a theme for you website. Whether that is a smooth shape like apple computer with rounded corners and glossy buttons or whether that is a wicked worn look with a brick texture or something that makes it look nostalgia or old or whatever feel you want to create you can do that with texture. And I was trying to just convey that in that chapter.

Paul Boag: Yeah I mean texture kind a gives character to the site in many ways doesn’t it from the kind of grunge look you get through to the highly reflective look, or like what you say, sites like Apple. So what kind of, you talked about points and lines and perhaps you could explain some of those concepts to us.

Jason Beaird: Right you can create any kind of visual effect with just points. I showed an example; a picture of my cat, abbie, created with a dot matrix printer kind of effect on it. It’s just points. And then you can move in and use lines and shapes. It’s just important to remember that lines can create movement, horizontal line doesn’t have as much movement as say a diagonal line or vertical lines lead you up and down the page. It’s important to remember eye movement when you are creating textures. But really it’s just like what I said about creating a tactile quality and theme for the website.

Paul Boag: So as far as people may be, say a developer who has just developed an application and he needs it to look kind of half decent but doesn’t want to do anything too risky incase he screws it up and he’s not a designer. I mean what kind of advice do you give a person like that? Do you encourage them, probably best to stay away from doing too much textual stuff or is that something you should get into?

Jason Beaird: I think it’s something you should think about. Texture can easily be overdone and it can become goofy and silly rather than being professional. And I think it’s just in moderation. The thing to remember is to not leave your website backgrounds on div’s, backgrounds colors on div’s. Create some kind of texture, feel to it, whether that’s rounded corners or whether to go for the minimal stick where you don’t really use background images but rely on negative space. It’s just the fact of going beyond the standard HTML look. I mean obviously with style sheets you can’t just leave it un-styled because it’s styled content has no structure to it any more because, we’ve taken out the tables we’ve taken out the design in HTML and now we are relying on style sheets, so now you really have to build something up. That’s good I think, it makes people think about texture and all these typography, colour all these elements of design. But to think about it and just go beyond the basics. Just try to recreate something that you already like, picture wise, that doesn’t mean stealing the design but looking at another website you think captures the professional look and feel that you are going for and try to recreate that in your website.

Paul Boag: Yeah, it’s interesting that you talk about looking for inspiration. What kind of advice do you give people for a good place to look, should they just be looking at other websites or should they be looking beyond the web a bit?

Jason Beaird: I really believe that people need to look beyond the web. One of the tags for this book is that you don’t need to go to art school to design great looking websites and well I was kind scared of that headline, that professors from collage would hate me for it. [Paul laugh] It’s really true because if you have a passion for it, it will draw an inspiration from all sorts of sources whether it is architecture, or goofy things like traffic patterns or a door that you see, anything really can really inspire a look and feel to a website. Jonathan Stickler wrote an article about how he was inspired by an art deco building and that’s what gave him the design idea for his current website design.

Paul Boag:Yeah, and I thinks that particularly true when it comes to texture and colour as well as you can see textures and colors around you in everything from a plant pot through to a magazine so yeah.

Jason Beaird: One of the other big things from going through a collage art programs is that if you go to school for graphic design you’re not just going to school for graphic design you actually have to take all the traditional art classes, painting, drawing, pottery sometimes, a lot of history and really the reason for that is to create a foundation to a visual exposure to art. So you have this vocabulary and this experience pool to draw from when you are creating other designs.

Paul Boag: You mentioned earlier, negative space when you were talking about texture as another kind of approach to things. Negative space is something I think designers always throw around; it’s a term that we like to use quite a lot. But it’s not something we ever kind of explain. Just spend a couple of minutes explaining how negative space works and why it’s so important, if you would.

Jason Beaird: Negative space is important because it allows you eye to move around things if you had a page completely crammed with text you wouldn’t have any focal point to start with apart from the top of the page. Our eyes usually gravitate towards the center of the composition, so if you think about that you can have an element something around the center of the composition that can lead you to another element. Negative space is really a tool for moving the eye around.

Paul Boag: Right.

Jason Beaird: If you have, like I said before diagonal lines create movement. If you have diagonal lines that move you up towards something else. I gave a few examples in the book; it’s hard to talk about it with having any visuals.

Paul Boag: Yeah I know. It’s frustrating isn’t it? I really sometimes, I really regret doing an audio podcast, it’s a bad choice. [laughs] Ok, let’s look at the subject of typography. I’m guessing it must have been a hard chapter to write because A) typography is a massive subject and B) typography on the web is quite a tricky area. It’s kind of easy to almost easy, as a non-designer, to dismiss typography by going; well there are only about 4 fonts I’m allowed to use anyway so therefore typography on the web doesn’t exist. Why is that wrong, why is that not the truth and how did you squeeze a chapter out of this.

Jason Beaird: Well just like a lot of the chapters there are a lot of books on the subject of typography that go way beyond our experience with web or even print graphic design that go way back to the roots of communication and that’s really what typography is about. Its communication and all websites you’re trying to communicate something so if you can’t do that with pictures and ideas you have to do that with words so the way those words appear to people should become part of your design. It’s on hard with the state that it’s in with the web, having a limited palette of fonts to choose from. But at the same time it’s a good thing, I think for the novice because even though we are limited to this certain number of fonts that everybody has in their computers. Most of those fonts aside from comic sans are decent [laughs] for body text and things like that. The most important thing to remember is that there are other fonts out there and to have sensitivity towards things like spacing between lines and the vertical rhythm. Vertical rhythm isn’t something I talked about in my book because I thought it was an advanced subject but right after the book was published it sort of exploded into a big topic in web design and there’s a lot great articles out there written by other great web designers about vertical rhythm and how that affects your typography.

Paul Boag: So what is vertical rhythm for those that don’t know?

Jason Beaird: Vertical rhythm is just creating a space between your lines that kind of matches up throughout the website so that the spacing in the lines in your navigation area and the spacing in your lines in the content area kind of line up and their not just randomly spaced apart so you get weird alignments between things. It’s creating vertical rhythm, it itself is a good description; you’re creating a rhythm or pattern for your eye to follow down the page.

Paul Boag: So it’s all about basically making sure multiple typographic elements across columns have some kind of relationship to one another and that they are not just higaty pigaty all over the place.

Jason Beaird: That s the way I understand it, that’s the way I think of it is it’s really about creating a pattern and paying attention to the way the text lines up.

Paul Boag: So whatever, bearing in mind that we are limited to such a small set of fonts. What sort of basic advice would you give to someone starting on in web typography. You mentioned line spacing, what are you getting at there?

Jason Beaird: The default line spacing for HTML is very tight. And with tight text like that it’s kind of hard to read And also thinking about the width of the text you are reading . When you are reading a newspaper article or a magazine article the reason the columns are so narrow is because it’s easy, or a book even, it’s easy for your eye to scan a certain width of text and it’s easy for your eye to move to the next line if there is a little bit of space between it. And if you kind of know those basic concepts you can make it a little more pleasing to read that the default set up for typography on the web.

Paul Boag: Yeah, because especially if you’ve got a fluid site you can end up with ridiculously long line lengths if you don’t.

Jason Beaird: Right and I think that’s a lot of the beef people have with fluid layouts is that not only are you taking power from the graphic designer but you’ll also making line widths that are incredibly hard to read. But in my opinion if the user is comfortable expanding the site out to that width, and it’s readable having the line width that long, then obviously they don’t have a problem with it. But you should sort of leave that up to the user if you can. But it’s been proven that it’s easier to read text that’s been set to a certain width.

Paul Boag: Are there certain type faces that are better suited to kind of headings in preference to body’s and vice versa?

Jason Beaird: Well with body text, traditionally it use to be that body text for books and that were set to times or serif fonts because the serifs sort of lead your eye to the next character, but because of the resolution we have with the monitors and the way the text is being presented it’s actually been proven that sans serif fonts are better, fonts like Arial and Helvetica, are easier to read in smaller sizes because you don’t get the kind of resolution, the kind of detail that you get with printed type. And now that’s changing, we’re getting higher and higher resolutions in displays so maybe that will change in the future. But it’s just important to know those kinds of idea when choosing the body type for your website. But when you are choosing a heading, when you’ve got something that is very large it really just matters how the text displays and because you can use images and because you can use things like (scalable Inman Flash Replacement) sIFR to display another font besides the standard 6 or 7 fonts that are available – I call it the ok 5 9 [laughs] that are available across the Mac and web computers, Mac and PC computers sorry. You can choose other fonts that are outside those fonts to use for headers or areas where you want to give a little more design appeal. So there is a world of fonts out there, some good, some corny, that are available, some free and some very expensive that you can use for the headline on your website and it’s just important to be aware of those other fonts. I gave a few resources for free fonts I like www.1001 fonts.com is a good place to go for licensed fonts is a great font boundary, there is just a lot of fonts makers that make excellent fonts, not just for printed material like books but for web designers and people working on the web should be aware as well.

Paul Boag: Cool. So the last chapter in your book talks about imagery and I’m fascinated, and I have to confess that I haven’t read that chapter yet, so I’m kind of fascinated to know what you cover in that chapter as far as using imagery on the web. What kind of advice do you give?

Jason Beaird: Well the imagery. The graphic design doesn’t stop creating the frame around the website. It’s also about formatting the inside which is kind of difficult when you give the power to the user, give them content management. But choosing supporting content imagery is one thing that can really enhance the user experience of the web site. And finding and creating supporting imagery for awebsite content can be very difficult if you don’t know where to look or if you’re not a good illustrator or if you are not good at Photoshop. So I just try to give a basic primer on finding this type of supporting imagery and if you find an image that might work, how to tweak it to work for your needs. I just wanted to give a basic intro to using stock photo sites like iPhoto or stock photo exchange which is sxc.hu is a free stock photography site that is really great it has a lot of images. Finding images and then using them in your site is one way to really enhance the experience for your user, beyond that also I try to warn people from stealing images from Google and stop using the stock images and stock photography that we are all use to seeing in most free publication. I mean really here are a lot of stock images that have been created; the guy with the light bulb over his head, the hands holding the tree that’s growing in the soil in the persons hands. These are clique in the stock photography world you have to be aware when choosing images, to enhance the user experience.

Paul Boag: Yeah, yeah, defiantly , did you cover any of the technical aspects of compressing images or whether to go gif or jpeg and that kind of thing.

Jason Beaird: Yeah I did give a quick primer on jpegs, gifs and pings. And just a quick for everybody, if you are using a photo you obviously want to use a jpeg because usually with photos you usually have a lot of different tones and images. And gifs and pings the file space is based on the number of colours in the image. If you are using an icon type thing or a colour field where you have a limited number of colours then gif or pings are the way to go. And choosing between gifs and pings is really all about choosing between the types of transparency you want to have. Internet explorer 6 and below doesn’t support alpha transparency where you have a sort of gradient from opaque to transparent it just supports on an off. So with pings if you have transparency then you get a pink halo around them. Areas where there is transparency you can’t see it, now there are fixes for that but it’s kind of hacky still and for that reason people still hang onto the good old gif format which has transparency and unfortunately also has animation. [Both laugh]

Paul Boag: So is that one of your rules? Never ever use animated gifs?

Jason Beaird: Actually no it’s not, because I’ve used animated gifs even on my own site if you go to my site jasongraphics.com and hover over the logo it was sort of an experiment toy to play with I was designing my current layout, it was a sliding door type image where I’ve got the still part of the Jason graphics logo and then when you move over it jumps up, the position of the image jumps up so you see the animated moving, like sunrays over the logo. So that’s an animated gif and I’m not ashamed of that. But I think that animated gifs in a lot of ways degrade the professionalism of a lot of websites.

Paul Boag: It sounds a superb book, for anyone that’s not from a design background. Where can they get a hold of a copy, where can they find out more about it, how can they buy it I guess is the next question?

Jason Beaird: Well I’d love you to buy it.

Paul Boag: Obviously.

Jason Beaird: I set a little promo site for the book at www.principlesofbeautifulwebdesign.com were you can kind of hover over, I did a fun little thing where if you hover over each of the chapter names it sort of point s out in the website design itself how the things play a part of the design I made for the promo site.

Paul Boag: Oh cool.

Jason Beaird: Beyond that amazon.com has a good price for the book usually and you can go of course to site point.com to buy directly from them, and most people prefer to do is buy directly from Sitepoint. They sent you lots of emails about books that are coming out and specials. A lot of people are big fans of Sitepoint. I really like them a lot too.

Paul Boag: Yeah if you haven’t checked out Sitepoint before, then it’s worth saying that they are a lot more than a book publisher they have got a huge site with tons of great articles of all aspects of web design and a really active forum as well.

Jason Beaird: The forums are a great place to get involved and a great place to learn new things.

Paul Boag: Thank you so much for coming on the show I can’t say I normally get people on the show to pimp their book and to be honest that wasn’t what I originally ask you to do either. But the more I think about it the more I’ll looked at it, the more I think it’s a perfect book for a lot people that listen to this show if you are starting out in any form of design and don’t come from a design background then I can highly recommend this is a book to check out. Jason, we’ll get you back again in the future no doubt and make you cover some of these things in more depth. But for now thanks you very much for being on the show.

Jason Beaird: I appreciate it, it’s like being on the Dave Letterman show or the Conon O’Brien [Paul laughs] it’s like a status symbol. But I’m glad to be here and thanks for having me on the show.

Paul Boag: Thanks very much.

Listeners email:

A excellent wire-framing tool

Robin:I’m a part-time web developer, committed to web standards, one day I’d like to make it my job. I’m a regular listener of boagworld in my car (traffic jam) going to work.

Remembering your discussion with Marcus about wire-framing (Powerpoint or Visio) i just came across this product: http://www.axure.com/demo.aspx. Looks spectacular although much to expensive for me (still).

Keep up the good work.

Building an online portfolio

Sultan:On the Headscape website I notice you have “related links” and “related pages”. What is the logic of that?

Also in your portfolio section when I click on a thumbnail why don’t you guys link to the actual sites rather than to a screen shot?

First of all let me say there is a lot about the Headscape website which I don’t like. It was built a while ago and our thinking has moved on.

One example of this is related pages and links. The logic was that related pages referred to other pages on the same website. Related links where external links to third parties. However in hindsight I don’t think that is a very clear distinction and should probably be changed.

I am however more happy with what we have done in our portfolio section. We have several reasons for the decision to link to screen shots rather than live sites. These include…

Some of the sites are intranets and not available to the public
Some sites had limited shelf life and are no longer available
We wanted the user to be able to click through multiples sites in quick succession

However, the primary reason is that clients often make significant alternations to the sites we deliver. After the end of the project we simply cannot guarantee that the quality of design and code will be maintained and so prefer not to directly link to the sites.

I am not suggesting that this is the right decision however it is the course of action we have chosen for Headscape.

Worthy of your attention in 2008

Posted in Web strategy on January 10, 2008 by Paul Boag

I want to look at 5 areas that need our attention if we want to ensure our careers stay on track in 2008.

As web designers we are all busy people. We are in such a fast moving sector that it can be hard to know what is worthy of our attention. Should we be focusing on Silverlight or brushing up on Javascript? Learning Rails or grappling with mobile devices? In this post I want to share my thoughts of where you should be focusing your energies in 2008.

I hate the raft of predication posts you see at the beginning of each year. I have intentionally tried to distance this one by leaving it a couple of weeks and by focusing on what we need to do rather than what might happen.

I want to look at 5 areas that need our attention if we want to ensure our careers stay on track in 2008. Of course, these are very generic choices and won’t apply to every web designer. If you specialise then this post is probably not for you. However, if you are a bit of an all rounder like me then it maybe relevant.

Focus 1: The rise of Javascript

Year on year we are seeing more and more creative things done at the cutting edge of web design using Javascript (and AJAX). However, despite that many of us still haven’t taken the time to become comfortable writing Javascript from scratch. Developers often consider it below them and designers find it too intimidating.

Until now we have largely been able to get away with it. We have copied and pasted when we need a certain bit of functionality and most of us haven’t had to build anything too complex that required Javascript. However, I believe that time is over. If you don’t know Javascript inside out in 2008 then I think it will really start to damage your career.

Having a good grasp of Javascript and indeed AJAX will be as much a requirement as knowing HTML and CSS. If you are a freelancer then you are going to struggle to fulfil client requirements and if you are in a full time job the next one is going to be hard to find without it.

Focus 2: The decline of web 2.0.

I don’t care what anybody else says we are in a bubble. I lived through the last one and this is another without a doubt. However, the problem with calling it a bubble is that it implies it will burst. I don’t necessarily think that will happen but I do believe it will slowly deflate like a soufflé over the coming year.

What does this mean to us as web designers? Well it could either mean very little or a hell of a lot depending on your circumstances. If you work for a web 2.0. company either directly or indirectly (your clients are web 2.0. companies) then I would be afraid. I can see many of these companies going under in the coming year and so you could well be without a job or loosing a lot of work.

If like the majority of us you aren’t working for a web 2.0. firm then the effect on you maybe minimal especially if you are working as an in-house designer/developer for an established company. However, if you work for an agency or are a freelancer you may see things becoming tougher.

At the moment there aren’t enough web designers out there for all the work that is about. Remove the majority of web 2.0. companies and suddenly you see a more competitive sector.

My advice, make sure you are working for a web established company or have a superb reputation to ensure you keep the work coming in when times get tough.

Focus 3: The necessity of frameworks

As times get tougher and competition gets more intense prices will start to drop. We wont be able to demand the rates we currently charge out at. Therefore efficiency will become king. We will need to work smarter if we are going to still make money.

Although I am not a great fan of frameworks I do think they will become important in this more competitive environment. Used right, frameworks allow for speed of production and keep costs down. Whether this means using “off the shelf frameworks” or developing them in-house I do not know. However, the key will be efficiency whether we are building applications, writing HTML/CSS or implementing Javascript.

Focus 4: The mobile web

But it is not all doom and gloom. As one door closes (those unrealistic web 2.0. businesses) another will open in the form of the mobile web. Whatever you think of the iphone and its lack of key features, it has stimulated the mobile market especially when it comes to the mobile web. We are seeing a growing number of competitive devices all of which have a strong mobile web component.

The mobile web offers a massive opportunity for a web designers career. With mainstream web design becoming increasingly competitive, the mobile web offers a new frontier where there are far fewer players. Being able to offer your clients mobile web services will start to prove beneficial as the year draws on and you may even find employers starting to ask for experience in this area when recruiting.

Take the time to learn the basics of designing for the mobile web this year. It will quickly pay off.

Focus 5: Widgets and the desktop

Finally, I believe 2008 should be the year that you look beyond building websites. For a while now the bigger players have been pushing their content out beyond the confines of their sites. Take ebay for example. You can view ebay products on other sites via widgets or even on your desktop through AIR applications. I don’t think it will be long now before mainstream website managers will want to do the same and it will be down to you to deliver.

Take the time to become familiar with some of the different widget and desktop standards out there. Admittedly there are a lot so if you are looking for one to start with I would recommend AIR from Adobe. I believe that being able to build AIR applications in 2008 will prove very beneficial.

So there you have it. Obviously this is not a comprehensive list and all of this is very subjective. However these will certainly be the areas I will be focusing on for 2008.

106. Back to work blues

Posted in Classic shows on January 9, 2008 by Paul Boag

On this week’s show: Paul and Marcus discuss common mistakes when creating your sites structure and Rachel Andrews shares her experiences of getting into web design.

Podcast: Download (29.5MB)

Download this show.

Launch our podcast player

News and events | Common mistakes of site structure | Rachel Andrews on building your web design career | Listener emails

Just a quick little request before we kick off today’s show. I need to get some more moo cards for the boagworld podcast (I am too tight to get proper business cards). Anyway I am having trouble with what to put on the cards. I was going to put a nice image on the cards but when I thought about it I couldn’t think of anything appropriate. In the end I decided to include tiny snippets from the reviews people have written about the show. However, being typically British with our self deprecating sense of humour. I decided to use the negative reviews rather than the positive ones. I have some great stuff such as “Paul has an ego that doesn’t need boosting” and “truly crappy jokes”. However, I need more. So, if you have 5 minutes this week drop me an email with a short, witty and hopefully not too rude review of the show. Let the venom flow :)

News and events

Internet Explorer 8

So the last time we did the news before Christmas Microsoft were under attack from Opera for its lack of standards support. Well, things have moved on since then and it is looking like Internet Explorer 8 is shaping up to be a very nice browser indeed. For start IE8 has passed the Acid 2 test published by the Web Standards Project. This is a definite commitment from Microsoft to provide comprehensive standards support and should be applauded. Jonathan Snook explains the ramifications of this as well as making some predications of his own as to what IE8 will look like. According to him we can expect straightforward column layouts, grid positioning and improved javascript support. Best of all if Jonathan is right we might see IE8 out in beta by the summer and in final release by next Christmas. Maybe then we can look at dropping support for IE6.

Using CSS to diagnose problems

Although there is still a lot of CSS not supported by browsers such as IE it is incredible what is possible with just what we have at the moment. Eric Meyer recently posted an article suggesting that you might want to consider using CSS to diagnose issues in your HTML that need resolving. In his article he uses CSS to find out where markup might be choking on missing accessibility features, targetless links, and just plain missing content. For example he uses CSS to visually highlight all images that have an empty or missing ALT attribute.

This isn’t an entirely new ideas. In fact Marco Battilana proposed a similar approach to highlight accessibility issues back in July 2006. However, Eric has taken it that much further and offered an excellent way of not only highlighting problems to yourself but also to your clients who maybe editing HTML.

Common accessibility mistakes

Talking about highlighting accessibility mistakes I came across a great article that does exactly that. Basically the article focuses on the fact that website owners can often be over enthusiastic when it comes to accessibility and start overusing HTML attributes designed to help accessibility. The result is that we can often do more harm than good. The article looks at the alt and title attributes which are often verbose or repetitious. It also looks at tabindex and accesskeys that can cause confusion and conflicts with normal browser behaviour. If you are applying any of these attributes to your code then I highly recommend you cast your eye over this article.

Basic design principles

The final story this week is an amazing series of posts by Patrick McNeil over at Design Meltdown. The reason I say they are amazing is because they are immense and I confess I am yet to read all of them. As you probably already know Design Meltdown tracks trends in web design and shows examples of sites that highlight these trends. Using the same example based approach Patrick looks at the fundamental principles of design and deconstructs them expertly. He covers Emphasis, Contrast, Balance, Alignment, Repetition and Flow in a screenshot packed series of posts that are a must read for anybody starting out in design. In the past I have always recommended Jason Beaird’s book “The Principles of Beautiful Web Design” for those starting out in design. In fact we have Jason on the show soon. However, if you don’t like reading books or want to save a bit of money then Patrick’s analysis is a credible alternative. Check it out.

Feature: Common mistakes of site structure

Just before Christmas I wrote my final blog post for the year on creating the structure for your site. It is a topic that I have been thinking a lot about recently because of various projects I am working on and so it was fresh in my mind. In particular it occurred to me how much harder producing a good site hierarchy is than it first appears. In fact I see the same common mistakes occurring again and again. It is these mistakes I want to look at in today’s show. Read Common mistakes of site structure.

Expert interview: Rachel Andrews on building a web design career

Paul: OK, so joining me today is Rachel Andrew from EdgeofMySeat.com. Hello Rachel. It’s good to have you on the show at last.

Rachel: Hello, Paul. It’s good to be here.

Paul: I feel like I’ve been trying to bully you to come on the show forever and ever and ever, but it hasn’t worked out for one reason or another, but we finally got you here, so that’s good news. So uhm, Rachel, when I came to kind of putting together what I was going to do, talking to you. I suddenly realized I didn’t know you very well. I’ve heard a lot about you and I’ve heard a lot of other people say good things about you, which has gotta be a good thing, but I didn’t know anything about your background or kind of how you came to be involved in web developement. So, I thought it might be quite interesting, if It’s ok with you, just to spend a few minutes talking about how you came to be a web developer. How did you get into this illustrious career?

Rachel: Uhm, completely by accident, really. It wasn’t something I intended to do. My training is as a dancer. I was going to dance. That’s all I ever wanted to do.

Paul: All right.

Rachel (laughing): So, the part where I ended up doing this surprised everyone, (Paul laughing) especially my programmer father. (Rachel laughs)

Paul: Ahhhhh

Rachel: We didn’t even have computers in school when I was in school. I’m showing my age.

Paul: Yeah, I know the feeling.

Rachel: Yeah, so, and I remember when I was, I don’t know, either 13 or 14 there were two guys that came in and said, “All of you will need to know about computers in your future careers.” And I was like, “No I won’t. I’m going to be a dancer.” and they couldnt tell me why I would need computers and so I felt quite pleased with myself. So, yes, it wasn’t on the radar after all.

Paul: So, how did you go from dance to web developement? It seems a bit of a leap there.

Rachel: Well, I know this is a fairly technical career, and I was working back stage for a quite a while and when I decided to quit dance for various reasons, I was working in the west end and I managed to my way into a back-stage techie job.

Paul: OK.

Rachel: I did work as a choreographer and I knew a reasonable amount about sound and lighting and could my way in. So, I worked back-stage in the west end and for a year and a half on Charlston and on The Mouse Trap.

Paul: Right, I see.

Rachel: So, so that was it. So, it wound up to be a technical kind of job and then I found myself pregnant with my daughter. And you cant go heaving around stage equipment while pregnant.

Paul: No.

Rachel: So (laughing), I found myself with some time on my hands. It was really that I even started using the internet.

Paul: Oh, ok.

Rachel: I was fairly young and didnt know anybody else with a child and pregnant.

Paul: What kind of… how long ago are we talking about here?

Rachel: Well, the said child is now nearly 11.

Paul: Right.

Rachel: So, quiet a while ago. ( laughing)

Paul: OK.(laughing)

Paul: So, in the relatively early days of the Web then to some degree…

Rachel: Yes. Yeah and I mean thats really so very important in that at the time there wasn’t actually that much to learn and I was chatting to people on for the parents on the forums because as I said, I didn’t know anyone with a baby and I didn’t know anything about babies. So, (Paul: Ahhh) I was using the web just to talk to other people in the same situation. And then if you wanted to put anything online there wasn’t Flickr or all of these hings. You really had to build a web site.

Paul: Right. Yeah.

Rachel: So, you know, once my daughter was born, I started putting together various HTML. So I could put together a web site telling people about her and things like that. And that’s what everyone did.

Paul: OK.

Rachel: You chat in the discussion forums and you build web sites. Uhm I don’t know… I quite liked that. That was always good fun. So, it didnt take that long before people would start asking me if I would build them a web site.

Paul: Mmhmm

Rachel: And… and at the time there was so little to know. You know, it was a bit of HTML and you had to do some basic things with images. As time went on, I realized I was actually quite interested in, what at the time fewer people were doing which was writing things with Perl which was about the only thing that anyone used to do things like guestbooks and (Paul: Yeah) posting forums to email. It was very, very limited at the time in terms of what people were doing on the server side. I sat down with the Orilley Camel book and taught myself Perl.

Paul: Oh Right, OK. (Rachel laughing) As you do.

Rachel: As you do. Obviously

Marcus: Or not, in my case.

Rachel: Yeah, well… I was bored. (all laughing) I had a baby. You know? Nothing else to do. So, that’s really how I got into doing the back-end stuff via such a strange route and I didn’t really realize what I was learning or if there was real reason to do so. It was interesting to me.

Paul: Do you think there was any advantages or drawbacks to taking that kind of route. I mean I know that most of us that entered the web in the early days did it through some convoluted route in preference to having some kind of formal training. Do you think the people that are coming along these days are going through a proper… you know, going through some kind of computer training course or whatever? Do you think their at a disadvantage for not learning it themselves and discovering it themselves.

Rachel: Well, yeah, but I think things are so different now. I mean back then, it really was a case of: You learned HTML. You learned a little bit about how to make graphics work online. And maybe, if you’re very pushy, you learned some Perl. (Paul: Yeah) And that was it. There wasn’t a huge amount of decisions. I mean, even just to start learning to do this now, you start having to think, “Well, which language do I want to learn? What is the best thing to be learning? Where should I put my time?” (Paul: Yeah, totally). You know, I was just kind of sitting with a little 486 computer and thinking, “You know… this is quite interesting. Look, I can do this!” But we were all just discovering what we could do at the time. Whereas now, if you’re looking at this as a career and what’s going to be best right from the start, before you’ve even gotten started, you know? (Paul: Yeah) So, It’s very different. And It’s very difficult when people always say, “Well, how did you get started? Have you got any suggestions on how I can get started?” And It’s so different now.

Paul: That’s probably one of the most common emails I get. It’s, how do you get started and what languages do you start with? So, I guess you really didn’t have a lot of choice. (Rachel (laughing): No…) It was Perl or nothing, wasn’t it?

Rachel: Really, I mean, yeah, there were other things around but generally people were writing in C, Javascript, and Perl. And the web host I happened to have, had this server which you were allowed to run your scripts on. (Paul: Oh, ok) (Rachel laughing) They were still slightly nervous of it. You know, it was just one server you could run things on. It was a quite good community around that. People would help each other out on how to do things.

Paul: So what advice do you give people who do write with those kinds of questions as to what languages to start with? What do you say?

Rachel: I think the important thing is to learn something well. At the end of the day, once you’ve learned one launguage, you can usually swap to something else. It’s the concept that’s the hard thing. (Paul: Yeah.) Understanding based design or understanding just the basic constructs of any language. Once you’ve done that, you can usually swap to something else. I usually say that PHP is a pretty good choice. Just because It’s out there, everywhere. (Paul: Yeah) You’re going to be able to easily find somewhere to run it. You can set up your own development environment without having to spend any money, really. You can get that all set up. And there is lots and lots of help and there is a great community around that. And to be honest, PHP is what we tend to develop in now and most of the time.

Paul: I mean, It’s quite interesting that you talk about those early days and how you basically got into it because you became a mother. But the early days in the web, and to be honest, to some extent now, there arent exactly a huge number of female developers around. I mean, it seems to be a very male dominated thing. Did that put you off? Did that create barriers to you?

Rachel: It didnt really at the time when I was learning because I came out of a very male dominated profession anyway, (Paul: Oh, OK.) having been working back stage. So, it didnt, worry me. And also at the time, I was just interested in learning it. I think out there in the work place once I became employed doing this, I encountered all sorts of strange situations where people really couldn’t quite get their head around the fact that I was technical and not like a designer or not something else that cliquey females are doing. I was the head of a technical team and went to help someone with a computer and I was the most senior person on the team. And they said, “Oh, can you not send one of the boys down?” (Paul gasps) I then said, “I can send one of the boys down. They’re not going to fix your computer for you, but I can send them down if that’s what you want.” (all laughing) I mean, so people were a bit taken aback, I think and don’t immediately assume that I do the job that I do (Paul: Yeah.) and are much more comfortable of putting me in a designer area.

Paul: Well, that was the mistake I made, isn’t it? (Rachel laughing) The first time, I suppose. I was the typical male chauvinist pig and presumed you are a designer, which I don’t know why. I think it was the hair color, more than anything.

Rachel (laughing): To be honest, I am not particularly hung up about it. It’s not something I get terribly upset about. I find it sort of intriguing that people just assume that. I’m not… you know… I’ve work in… sort of male dominated jobs for a long, long time now and I think if I got terribly upset about these things I wouldn’t be doing it. It is interesting. But in other ways, it works for me. When I was going for job interviews, for instance, if I’m the only woman who walks in and there are lots and lots of men, they’re going to remember me. (Paul: Yeah) And in the same, you know, if I’m pitching for work it’s a talking point. You know, people are always interested as to why I’m doing what I’m doing.

Paul: Damn, and here I was thinking I was asking original questions!

(Rachel and Paul laugh)

Rachel: I think sometimes, it does work for me because do remember. They would think can’t a woman do something a bit unusual?

Paul: Do you think it’s a problem within the industry or would you just think It’s one of those things and what will be will be kind of attitude?

Rachel: It’s really hard to see where it’s a problem. I think It’s a problem if girls or young women who are looking at career choices are being put off because they don’t see female role models out there. And, there’s lots of reasons why. There are women around doing this and tend not to be so high profile. (Paul: Yeah) I mean the reason that I’m not touring around all the different events and things is because I’m a mom. (Paul: Yeah!) You know, and I think that’s the same for an awful lot of women. I talked about this on my blog once and got loads and loads of women contacting me going, “Yes, exactly!” We’re the one’s doing the majority of childcare. I know there are men in that position too, and I’m not saying there aren’t men who are having to be… going to pick up kids at 3:00 or whatever it is. But it does tend to be women and It’s often the women who make that choice or wants to spend time close to the kids when they’re very little. My daughter is getting older but even so, I still wouldn’t be happy about, say going to a different country and leaving her here to go to an event.

Paul: Yeah. I mean to be honest, even for this interview we kind of have to fit it in around you taking your child somewhere, Marcus has got to do a school run in a minute. You know, so, it’s all part of the kind of… yeah… It’s nice we’re in a position where we can kind of fit our work around our families. It’s a good thing, not a bad thing.

Rachel: Yes, it is. And I think that’s possibly one of the reasons why there aren’t so many high profile women, because it takes time to raise your profile. And without me quite looking, I’ve been able to do that through writing, which I can do at midnight or whatever. If you’re going to get out there and get around to all the conferences and things, you know, and look at what other people who are considered to be my peer group and what they’re doing. I just couldn’t physically do that. (Paul: Yeah, totally) Because, I don’t want to. I don’t want to spend a lot of time away from my daughter right now. Maybe in 6 years time, she will be very disinterested in spending any time with me.

(Rachel and Paul Laughing)

Paul: Once she’s a teen-ager, you won’t want to be with her either.

(Both continue laughing)

Rachel: Exactly, you know, so things change but there are quite a lot of people with quite young children and actually more and more so. It’s quite funny, I feel like I’ve got quite an old child for the group of people that I speak to. There are lots of new developer babies out there.

Paul: Yeah, well Marcus is old and decrepit.

Marcus: Well, just to depress you, Rachel, what happens when they get older and become teenagers, they just rely on you as a taxi service.

Rachel: Well, I get that as well. That was the case today. I was ferrying mine and two others back from the

Marcus: The only thing I would say though is, we went through a period about 6 months the beginning of this year, trying to recruit new developers. And we only interviewed one woman out of probably a dozen candidates

Paul: I think that it’s worth saying that’s because we only have 1 woman apply, rather than we segregated all the women who refused to interview.

Marcus: That’s what I meant. Yes, well put Paul. We literally had only 1 woman apply, so yeah… I don’t really know why. Maybe it just seemed like kind of a boy’s area at the moment. I suppose, from what you were saying about the fact that you’re not inclined to go out there and sort of go out on the circuit like Paul does. I suppose until that happens, and maybe younger women who aren’t thinking about motherhood yet, are the ones who are going to be out there raising the profile of women and hopefully, this sort of “boys’ club” type mentality will sort of just fizzle away.

Paul: I mean, It’s quite interesting that you say, how you talked about how you managed to raise your profiles through writing. Tell us a little about that. How did you get into writing books? Because, you seem quite prolific. I did a quick search on Amazon to see exactly how much you’ve written and it seemed to go on for quite a long while.

Rachel: Yeah, there’s quite a few. That was, again, like most things, I tend to say, “Oh yes, I’ll have a go at that!” and then worry about it later. It was a long time ago, I had written some stuff for the Macromedia Web Site about Dreamweaver.

Paul: OK

Rachel: And it was Glasshouse who contacted me and said, “Oh, would you write a couple of chapters for a book?” A couple of chapters, that would be alright, you know (laughing). (Paul: Yeah, no big deal). So yeah, I wrote a couple of chapter for a book and it kind of went from there, really. I like writing. I enjoy… I’m much more from an arts background really than technical. So, I do enjoy writing and putting things across that way. So, yeah, it just went from there. And then when someone said, “Oh, will you write a few more chapters?” Yeah, ok, that was alright. (laughs) And before I know it, I’ve got this great list of books.

Paul: Yeah. It’s a very time consuming thing to do. I mean, beyond the fact that you obviously sound like you enjoy doing it. Do you find it beneficial from a publicity angle for bringing in work?

Rachel: Yeah, absolutely. I think people tend to see you as an expert if you’ve got things in print; if you’ve written things. It does sort of depend that you do know what you’re talking about. And especially with what I do, which is much more… It’s not like I have to show a nice portfolio of pretty things. This is what I can do. What people are doing when they hire me or hire my company is they are hiring us for our expertise. And they have to constant that we actually are experts; that we know what we’re talking about. So the writing does help in that because people assume that if someone let you write a book, you must actually know what you are talking about.

Paul: I mean, I get emails from people asking how do you go about raising your profile. I’m quite interested as to whether you stumbled into this. You know, you talked about you were writing for the Macromedia web site. Did you go out purposefully, intending to write for them or did it just kind of happen? How’s that come about?

Rachel: Again, that really just happened. But because I was writing on my own blog, and I was writing… you know, I was helping people out in forums. (Paul: Right) You know, if you’re out there doing things, people do notice. I mean certainly with things like magazines and books and you know, varies sites that want articles. There are people out there that are looking for people to write all the time, because there’s actually an awful lot of people who know what they’re doing but there are fewer who can express it and express it in a way that someone new to the concept is going to understand. If you are able to do that, if that’s something you can do and you are doing that on your own site or are helping people out in forums and things then it will get noticed. And there are quite a bit of places you can be submitting I suppose, to, you know, Site Point and Vitamin… There’s quite a bit of other sites that accept good content. (Paul: Yeah.) It means that you have to write a few things that you’re not paid for to get going. You can find then, that you can start putting together a body of work and say, “Well, this is the stuff I’ve done.” It’s not in It’self something that you earn a huge amount of money from. I think people who write for a living must have to work incredibly hard.

Paul: (laughing) Or be incredibly good. One or the other.

(Rachel and Paul laughing)

Rachel: Both I think, both. As something that helps raise your profile for the other things you do. If I found it an absolute chore, I don’t think I would do it because you don’t want to be sogging away at things you can’t stand in the hope that it will get you some profile. But it is one way to do it and It’s certainly a way to do it if you are in a position where you can’t get out to lots of events or you’re not someone who wants to do public speaking. I’m not keen at all on public speaking. I much rather hide behind the computer (laughing).

Paul: A proper developer. That’s what I like to hear.

Rachel: So, you know, It’s another way of doing it, because I do sort of think of the public speaking if you’re going to be thinking of conferences as being something that would really get that profile up there. No one has really met me until fairly recently at any events because I didn’t get to anything really. And yet a lot people would have known of me and the stuff I’ve done because of the lighting.

Paul: I mean, you talk about that you use this as a mechanism to you know, to increase your profile for the other work that you do. So, perhaps we ought to talk about the other work that you do. I mean, you run a company, “Edge of My Seat” which is edgeofmyseat.com. How did that start? You obviously from going… from being an enthusiastic amateur, you must have gotten a job in web design, I’m guessing. How did you go about getting that job and from there, how did you end up running your own company?

Rachel: Well, I… When I decided I actually wanted to go back to work… I’ve been doing bIt’s and pieces while my daughter was quite little and I decided I wanted to go back to work and it was really tail-end of this whole dot com era. (Paul: Oh, OK.) And so, I ended up heading up a technical team at Property Finder. (Paul: Oh, OK. Yeah, I know.) Which was very much on the technical side and we managed the servers and things like that rather than even doing any development or very much development. There were other people who were more on the development team, although we still did bIt’s and pieces. I did that for a while and the whole sort of dot com thing was starting to fall apart really, at that point. And I moved to another dot com company who built portal sites for accountants. So I know quite a bit about stage integration (Paul: Wow. What an exciting life you have). Yeah, but that’s the time where things really weren’t looking that stable and I felt, well I can actually do this myself. And at least then I would know where I was in terms of whether I was going to get paid by people. The problem is being employed in an unstable situation is that really, you can work a whole month and get to the end of the month and find out that nobody’s paying you. (Paul: Yeah.) And so I figured that actually, I may be better off setting off on my own. And so people had asked if I would take on bIt’s of freelance work and things. And so, I actually purchased a printer’s trust because at the time I was a young single mom. I’m not so young anymore but I purchased a printer’s trust and this in 2001. And they basically gave me a small grant and loan to get the company started. So, I had about a month’s money when I started. (laughing) I didn’t have the dot coms, so I kind of had to work. (Paul: Wow!) It’s a good way to start a business, you know (Paul: Yeah.) … make or break really. If it doesn’t work, we don’t eat.

(Rachel, Paul and Marcus laughing)

Marcus: I remember that feeling very well.

Rachel: Yeah.

Paul: Yes

Rachel: But it makes you really dive into it. The nice thing was, because I was paying for a child, mind you, at the time, I actually only had to earn half of what I had earned because I could keep her home with me.

Paul: Ahh, ok.

Rachel: So, I must have cut my expenses by being able sort of work around my daughter’s schedule and things. So, that kind of worked out alright and really, it went from there.

Paul: So how did you begin to win the business in that first month of, “Oh crap! What have I done?” (Rachel and Marcus laugh) You know, where did the work come from?

Rachel: Well, at the time, what I realized was that because of how the dot com was collapsing, everyone was getting rid of their developers. But they still had all these applications. And something I’ve always been good at is picking up on other people’s stuff and working on it. So, probably, uhm, September ’01, which was like a terrible time to start a company (Rachel and Paul laugh) and really for the first two or three years was taking stuff that was already built and was falling apart, or the developers had gone or had all sorts of problems with it and just fixing it or adding bits to it. And I did lots and lots of that which, during this time of recession, really, was actually, really good work because there was plenty of it. Everything had to have been built while they had lots of developers and they had money and things. And so I sort helped things limp along a lot. And what this sort of lead to really was this idea of doing development for design agencies. (Paul: OK.) And focusing on doing really good development to support really nice design. That really is what we’ve moved on to do now. Most of our clients are designers or design agencies. And they do a really good design, and then they hand it over to us and we look after it and we make sure it will work. (laughing) That’s actually a really nice way to work because it means we get to work with some really nice stuff, anyway, well designed stuff and we have people who care about what they do. (Paul: Yeah.) And we get to do the development side of things that we enjoy. Sort of working with people rather just sort of chucking things over the fence and throwing it back.

Marcus: The point your picking about picking up what other people have done and fixing it and that kind of thing… did that not kind of cause you problems with development platforms and having to deal with lots of different types of languages and that kind of thing?

Rachel: Yeah. I had learned ASP by that point and a bit of Java. And I tend to not have too much problems swapping from one thing to the other. Certainly, I mean then, it was a lot of Perl and my class PSP. Because that was, at this sort of time, they were really the two things that you were seeing things built in. So, I used to do either and then I started doing PHP as well around the same time. So, I’ve always been quite happy swapping between languages, swapping between databases. (Marcus begins to speak: I think the reason why…) It gets a bit much if you do too many in one day, you know, because you start putting semi-colons in the wrong place and stuff. It doesn’t really bother me too much. I mean, its nice to be able to concentrate one thing. As I said, we tend to build new stuff in PHP. But, I’m generally quite happy switching around.

Marcus: I suppose, the reason why I was asking is we’ve come across a few briefs that we’ve been sent in the past where it seemed like the perfect job for us but the development platform in particular has been something that we just don’t work on. Do we want to invest on that kind of platform just so we can go after this job and quite often, we’ve thought to ourselves, “No, we don’t.” So, I guess that’s where the question is coming from.

Rachel: Yeah, I think in terms of new stuff, you kind of do have to focus unless you’ve got an awful lot of people able to create your own libraries and things in different languages. So for new stuff, we do tend to choose PHP but at the time, what I was doing was just picking up on stuff. It was less of a problem really because I was just fixing stuff that already existed.

Paul: You seem to have done very well over the last few years and Drew has come and joined you now and you seem to be branching out a bit into the area of training. That seems to be something that’s come up.

Rachel: Yup.

Paul: I’m quite interested, you know… it’s great you’re there and you’re able to offer training courses. You do have a basic CSS training course, I think (R: Mmmhmm) and you’re talking about doing an advanced one, is that right?

Rachel: Possibly going to do that. We’ve had a few people ask. (Paul: OK) So, that’s what we’re thinking of doing.

Paul: So, I mean, the question now is who trains the trainer? How do you guys stay on top of the latest things that are emerging and how do you keep up with what’s going on?

Rachel: Well, basically, because we are doing it all the time, I think. The difference between us and a training company that just does training is that actually what we’re doing is, we’re using this stuff all the time. It’s the same as when I buy a book. I’m writing a book from the point of view of someone who has to do this. You know, who practically is doing it. And it’s the same with the training. Obviously, we’re constantly reading up on new things and trying things out in browsers and trying to get around problems and just by the day to day work that we do. So, that’s really what we’re bringing to a training course. For two or three years, people have asked me if I would do training. But until Drew joined, we just didn’t have the capacity. It comes down to one of those things that have to be arranged. So, it wasn’t saying that I really felt that I couldn’t do, but Drew was making to do it as well. Its great fun. Its an enjoyable… its actually enjoyable to be face-to-face with people. Especially writing a book and then the feedback you get as the occasional email that people say, “Oh, I really enjoyed that!” or, “Why did you say this? Its rubbish!” (Rachel and Paul laughing) Actually being face-to-face with people and seeing how they work through the course is really, really interesting and great fun.

Paul: Cool!

Rachel: So, yes. It’s been good.

Paul: Excellent! Well, thank you so much, Rachel, for coming on the show. It was really good to hear how you got into things and how your career has progressed. Even if it’s somewhat chaotic along the way. Although I can associate with that (Rachel laughing) kind of bouncing from one thing… We’d set up Headscape in January, 2002. So we were only 3 months behind you, so we understand your pain there.

Rachel: Yes, well it wasn’t the best time, really.

Marcus: We were both made redundant from a dot com in December, 2001, so it was necessity that got Headscape, I think.

Paul: Yeah. Always the best way. OK, thank you very much, Rachel, uhm and I’m sure that we will get you back on the show again if you’re willing at some point (Rachel laughing) in the future. Alright, thank you.

Rachel: OK.

Listeners email:

So just before we wrap up the show I wanted to share with you an idea sent in recently by a listener (sorry I can’t find your name)! A number of you have written in since we said we were going to change the format of the show with ideas about how things could be improved. One idea that particularly appealed to me was a new short section at the end of the show where we read out some listeners emails. These emails could be a question, comment, recommendation or indeed anything else you think others maybe interested in. So whether you have a tip for improving your sites search engine rankings or just want to tell me how ignorant we are then drop us an email. Write in soon as we need content for next weeks show!

105. Christmas Cheer

Posted in Classic shows on December 19, 2007 by Paul Boag

On this week’s show: Paul suggests some gifts to buy the geek in your life. Marcus talks about wireframes and Matthew Paterson talks about the Email Standards Project.

Download this show.

Clear:left winner

Congratulations to Ryan Downie who is the lucky winner of the Clear:Left training competition. Ryan will have his pick of either a place on the CSS Mastery.

If you didn’t win do not despair. There are places still available on both courses for a mere £345 + VAT. I have attended Jeremy Keith’s course on AJAX and have to say it was superb. I am sure the CSS course is just as good. Go to the clear:left website for more details.

News and events

Opera goes on the offensive against Microsoft

Without a doubt the biggest story of the week and in many ways the year is the fact that Opera is filing an antitrust suit against Microsoft. This story is huge, not because one browser manufacturer is litigating against another (something that is a common occurrence) but because of the strange ripple effect this seems to be causing in the web design community.

However, before we get into the ripples lets look at the antitrust suit itself. Operas beef seems to focus on two areas. First, they object to Internet Explorer being bundled with Windows (surprise, surprise). Second, they are complaining about Microsoft’s lack of commitments to web standards.

Call me an old cynic but this whole thing stinks of a massive PR exercise. This is especially true when it comes to the complaints about standards. As Eric Meyer points out, the timing of this claim seems odd to say the last. If the suit had been filed before the release of IE7 it would make some kind of sense. It was certainly true that standards support in IE was very poor. However, IE7 is a huge step forward and Microsoft seem to be active in its development of IE8.

To me this just looks like an exercise in pandering to the gripes of the web design community. It was as if Opera knew it wouldn’t get a lot of support for the whole “unbundle IE” argument and so threw in the standards issue to drum up some support.

However, as I have already said, the Opera antitrust suit is not the most interesting part of this story. The real clincher is the spin off discussion that has emerged sparked primarily by a very provocative post by Andy Clarke. He argues that this suit makes the position of the W3C CSS working group untenable. Andy asks how Microsoft and Opera can work together to create the next generation of CSS when they are in legal action over exactly that issue. This has led to a much wider discussion about how the W3C works and highlighted a divide between how browser manufacturers and designers see the world. Without a doubt there is huge frustration at the glacier speed at which the W3C moves. This is largely due to the challenges faced by browser manufacturers in implementing the specifications.

But the story does not end there. This frustration with slow progress seems to extend beyond even the W3C to also encompass the Web Standards Project which was setup precisely to push for better standards support. Some very prominent figures are even questioning its role.

If we as web designers want to pressure browser makers to provide better standards support then we need to invest in organisations like WaSP. They need to have the kind of funding that political lobby groups have. This will enable them to employ full time staff to constantly lobby and educate browser providers on what web designers need. In my opinion we as web designers need to put our money where our mouth is and start giving financing to organisations like WaSP so they can be more effective.

Boagworld christmas appeal

Talking about putting your money where your mouth is, I would like to thank everybody who has been kind enough to give to our Christmas Appeal. We have been raising money to support an orphanage and school in an extremely poor part of India. The idea is that you pay for anything of value you have received from Boagworld. Ask yourself how much have we taught you on the show? How much have we entertained you? Then decide how much you would pay for that and give that money.

So far we have received £465 and we are still collecting. Even if you hear this show after Christmas we are still collecting! To donate something or for more information go to christmas.boagworld.com.

The best CSS designs of 2007

Not only is Christmas almost upon us, the year is about to draw to a close. This makes it the time of year when bloggers look back at the year just gone and compile “the best of 2007″ lists. Normally I am lukewarm about such things however there is a great list over at web designer wall. They have compiled the best of CSS design in 2007. If you are in need of inspiration this is definitely worth a look. There is some truly stunning stuff here.

Talking of rating design you might also want to check out commandshift3.com which is basically hot or not for web design. When you visit the homepage you are shown two designs and you click on the design you prefer. Not only does it allow you to vote for designs it also lets you look at the best and worst based on votes received. This makes it a great site for inspiration and for learning what not to do!

Marcus’ bit: Quick and Dirty Wireframes

So a couple of week’s ago I wrote a post on the use of wireframes in web design. Marcus couldn’t come up with a decent topic to talk about himself this week so has decided to reuse my post and pass it off as his own! ;)

Paul’s corner: Geek Gifts for Christmas

For my segment of the show this week I decided it might be fun to look at Christmas presents. Specifically what you should buy for the geek in your life. In order to avoid it sounding like a wish list for myself the items I have picked are items that I own myself and can personally recommend.

Ask the expert: Introduction to the Email Standards Project

Hello world of Boag, I’m here today just to give you a really quick introduction to the Email Standards Project, a new community effort that has launched recently.

If you’re a web designer, and you’ve ever created HTML emails, you will know that getting them to look reasonably consistent across the major email clients is hair-pullingly frustrating.

At least with websites, there are only a few major browsers you have to worry about, and thanks to the Web Standards Project they are much improved from the days of the browser wars. With email you have at least 12 email clients with big shares of the audience.

Unfortunately, HTML email is still stuck back in 1998 with that Celine Dion song from ‘Titanic’ – nobody wants to be there. Over the last 10 years, web designers, and particularly web standardsy type designer, have generally taken a ‘Just Say No’ approach to HTML email. ‘Don’t send it, don’t read it, pretend it never happened’.

That approach has not been a spectacular success – millions of people still sent HTML emails, but because the designers wouldn’t touch them they were hideously ugly and just made designers hate them even more.

HTML email is here to stay. It is the default format in many clients, and sometimes it really does give a better experience for the reader than plain text. The Threadless newsletter is a great example – the send every week an email with pictures of the latest shirts. Trying to describe the shirts in text is nowhere near as useful. A picture is worth at least 1,000 words!

So here we are in 2007, and in order to get reasonable rendering, designers are having to dust off their table coding skills to get things working in Outlook, Lotus Notes, Gmail, Yahoo, Thunderbird…it goes on.

At Freshview we deal with designers every day through Campaign Monitor and MailBuild who are struggling with this problem, and we finally decided to do something about it. That is where the Email Standards Project came from.

Together with a few other people we’ve put a site up at http://www.email-standards.org (email hyphen standards dot org), and you will find a link for that in the show notes. The central idea of the Email Standards Project is that we want to work with designers and with email client developers to improve support for web standards in email clients.

It’s not one of those sites that is all talk and no practicality though – jump onto the site and you will see a bunch of tests we have done to work out exactly what does, and what does not work in all the major email clients as far as a core of normal HTML and CSS like padding, margins, floats, lists and so on.

If you’ve seen the Acid test for browsers, over at the Web Standards Project, then this is basically the same idea except for email. We’ve already had some contact with some of the big email client representatives about our results, which is really exciting. Check out the blog for updates in that area.

If you know the pain of designing HTML emails, and you want to support the project, then there is a section on the site that covers that too, and we’ve had a huge number of people offer to help, and some great feedback from people like Jeffrey Zeldman and Cameron Moll.

If you are a website owner, and you want to know why this matters to you, then check out the site for an article on why web standards are important for email, or talk to your web design firm. As is often the case, it comes down to money – better standards support means less time spent getting things to work, and more time on the actual design.

So thanks for giving me the chance to say a few words about the Email Standards Project, and I hope you all do get a chance to checkout the website, email-standards.org.

Happy Christmas!

That about wraps it up for this week’s show. We will be back with a slightly amended format as from Wednesday the 9th January. See you then.

104. Give us your money

Posted in Classic shows on December 12, 2007 by Paul Boag

On this week’s show: Paul shares 10 tips for getting designs signed off. Marcus looks at how to present to a prospective client and Michael Slater introduces us to Ruby on Rails.

Podcast: Download (25.5MB)

Download this show.

Launch our podcast player

News and events | Marcus: How to present to a prospective client | Paul: 10 tips for design sign off | Michael Slater talks about Ruby on Rails | Question of the week

Housekeeping

All change

I have a bit of housekeeping news before we go any further with the show. I am changing things around a bit with my podcasting line up. After a chat with Dan Oliver from .net magazine we have decided that I will no longer be doing their show. They have some great plans for it in the future but it just didn’t make sense for me to keep doing two very similar shows. Before people start emailing, no we haven’t had a falling out and I still love Dan very much… if only I wasn’t already married.

The good news is that this allows me to introduce some more guests onto this show and bring in a bit more discussion. In order to accommodate this we will be having just one feature section each week instead of my bit and Marcus bit. Some weeks I will do it and other weeks it will be Marcus.

The final aspect of all of this is that we are going to start recording the show together rather than over skype. This should deal with the audio problems we have been having as well as making for a much better dynamic.

Christmas giving

I thought it might be nice to use the mighty power of the Boagworld listeners to raise a bit of money this Christmas and wondered if you might all be so kind as to help.

We have been doing this show for well over 2 years and have never charged or done much in the way of advertising. We are therefore wondering if just this once you would dip your hands into your pockets and give a bit of cash.

I want to raise some money for a charity I have been personally supporting for a while. A friend I grew up with now runs a school and orphanage in a very rural part of India. The kids they work with have far from the best background and the school is the only hope they have of breaking out of their circumstances.

I wont emotionally blackmail you with sob stories (because I know you are hardened cynical geeks) but simply ask that you give me some cash in return for the two years of free shows I have given you.

Because I am unorganised and only thought of this a couple of days ago we are going to simply use my paypal account to collect donations. I will then pass the money on to the charity. So to give a donation just use the bottom below (be warned its not the most intuitive system ever but you are all clever chaps. I am sure you will work it out).

Give to the Boagworld Christmas Appeal

News and events

24 ways is back

My first story of the day is actually 12 days late because it is the re-launch of 24 ways. In case you haven’t come across 24 ways before I should explain that it is an advent calendar for web designers.

Each day in December leading up to Christmas they publish an article written by some of the leading lights in web design (oh yes, and me). The articles are somewhat random but also incredibly practical and hands on. Articles range from creating a never-ending background to working with online maps.

But don’t panic that you have missed the first half of advent. You can access all of the previous days. In fact you can even access the last 2 years of articles. Ample to keep you amused while we are away over Christmas.

Tips for development and design

If 24 ways isn’t enough to quench your thirst for knowledge then let’s throw two more articles into the mix both of which provide some top tips.

The first is for all you developers out there. The guys at Blue Flavor have shared their top 10 tips for a successful development project. The article includes great advice like, always create a functional spec and talk to your clients. Interestingly one of the suggestions is to use a version control system. This is also a tip in our second article which is aimed instead at designers.

Jina Bolton has written an interesting article for Think Vitamin entitled “creating sexy stylesheets“. Like the blue flavor article this one lists 10 tips. However this time they are for producing better stylesheets. Now, although I would argue that nothing makes CSS sexy this is still a very useful list. The tips for organising your CSS file and building your own framework are particularly good.

So if you are into top 10 lists then you should be happy this week whether you are a designer or a developer.

24 wayswhich post articles on web design over the Christmas period. Well, I was asked to contribute to the site so I wrote an article entitled 10 tips for design sign off. Although some of the tips have been covered on the show I thought generally it would make a good segment for the show.

The problem is that getting design sign off can be one of the most challenging parts of the web design process. It can prove time consuming, demoralizing and if you are not careful can lead to a dissatisfied client. What is more you can end up with a design that you are ashamed to include in your portfolio.

How then can you ensure that the design you produce is the one that gets built? How can you get the client to sign off on your design? (Question of the week

What tips do you have for getting designs signed off?

News and events

IE testing made easy

Hosting your Javascript libraries

Prototyping website interaction in flash

The rule of thirds

Feature: Defying Conventions

Interview: Patrick Lauke on WCAG2

Listeners feedback:

What are the key features of a CMS

Is certification worth it?

News and events

New tools for web designers on the way

Effective online delivery of video

Some Javascript slight of hand

Overcoming creative block

Feature: Location Aware

Interview: Tom Coates on Fire Eagle

Give Away: Fire Eagle Invites

Listeners feedback:

Tabbed menus?

Choosing AJAX

The Javascript

The problem with AJAX

News and events

Creating grid layouts

Flash goes open source

Accessibility and AJAX

Developing effective forum leadership

Feature: The personal website is dead

Interview: Jeff Croft Talks About His View On Web Standards

Listeners feedback:

Getting a site off the ground

Testing

Information Architect

Graduate web developer

About Headscape

News and events

Microsoft launches beta of Internet Explorer 8

Designers agnst

Usability challenges associated with web applications

Feature: Lessons learnt SXSW

Interview: Garrett Dimon on form design

Listeners feedback:

Finding usability test subjects

Accessible tables

News and events

Instant mobile sites

Layout, do’s and don’ts

jQuery for designers

Feature: User testing scripts

Expert interview: Alex Mogilevsky

Listeners email:

Implementing RSS

Should designers just design

News and events

Highly extensible CSS

Video tools

Microformat boost

Feature: Hiring new staff

Expert interview: Christian Heilmann on common Javascript mistakes

Listeners email:

Rolling out new features

Content management and CSS

News and events

Some customers are not worth caring about

Version targeting rumbles on

Let users tagging your posts with delicious

Feature: Using HTML snippets

Expert interview: Jina Bolton on women in web design

Listeners email:

SXSW

Moving to the mac

Templating doesn’t work

Using snippets

CSS fragments

JavaScript functions

Conclusions

News and events

Fixing your product pages

Being inspired by newspaper design

Getting a site
off the ground