Blog » Archive by category 'Web Development'
An interesting thought in indexing and handling page structure is the concept that different areas of a single page can be identified and considered independently from surrounding bodies of content. This particularly applies to specific and readily identifiable data-types, such as phone numbers, postal codes, or abbreviations; but can also be extended to include broader content labeling.
A well-structured XML document has an absolutely clear labeling system for data built into the structure. If you take any RSS feed, for example, the elements which identify <title>, <link> or <managingEditor> can’t readily be mistaken.
A well-structured, semantically sensible XHTML or HTML document doesn’t offer nearly the same degree of data particulation — - the higher level data elements can sometimes be fairly clear, as is the case with <address> or <cite> elements, but other potentially valuable elements end up providing relatively neutral value: <h2> or <div>.
Read more: Thoughts about Content Labeling and Data
Example:
Visit this site! http://www.joedolson.com/
I run into this, or into something like it all the time, and it’s pretty understandable why. Obviously, if you don’t know how to create a hyperlink, or if you’re working with a CMS which will automatically convert a URL into a hyperlink, this is the most reliable way to provide access to somebody else’s site.
Either they have the URL, and can use it “straight up” if they know how, or they can follow the hyperlink generated by the system. Nice and easy. I understand perfectly well why an inexperienced content manager might make use of hyperlinks au naturelle, or so to speak.
Read more: On the usability of contextual URLs
The winter issue of Search Marketing Standard is out today - and along with the latest issue, I’m inviting you to take advantage of a limited-time offer from Search Marketing standard which will allow you to subscribe at 67% off the cover price. Now, Search Marketing Standard is already a pretty reasonably priced publication at $15/year — - but this discount will give you a year’s subscription for $4.95. ($6.60 for international subscriptions.)
Now, I don’t normally go out of my way to advertise for companies on this blog. However, there’s an extra little piece of incentive in this case which makes me a bit more inclined to push this. Specifically, for every subscriber using coupon code HOLIDAY67, Search Marketing Standard will be donating $1 to the charity Toys for Tots.
The promotion is good for two weeks - it’ll end on Monday, December 10th. Just enter the coupon code HOLIDAY67 during registration to get your subscription.
And a note to those who keep track of these things: Search Marketing Standard is a good publication. They focus on analytics-based, meaningful issues in Search Marketing. This isn’t a publication where you’re going to see anybody recommending cloaking, keyword-stuffing, or any of those many highly questionable practices in the SEO world. It’s not about accessibility, but this publication discusses methods which somebody with a commitment to standards-based, accessible web development can faithfully use to make serious progress in the search marketing arena — - without breaking their other commitments.
Subscribe to Search Marketing Standard
At least, in the final reckoning.
Something which comes up over and over in my work is the tendency of clients to request design changes which I don’t particularly care for. This isn’t to say that they’re ugly, per se — - after all, the fact that I don’t like them isn’t actually equal to “ugly.”
Early on, I would argue with clients concerning these design changes — - try and get them to see my perspective, etc. But the fact is that aesthetics are not objective. Opinion matters; and it’s ultimately the client’s decision.
Now, I only argue with decision which cause problems. You want that to be blue instead of green? Fine. Doesn’t matter to me that it’s going to clash with the rest of the color scheme. But you want that text to be blue against an orange background? That, I won’t do. That’s the kind of decision which will render the text unreadable — - and I’m not willing to do it.
Occasionally in my consulting practice I encounter designers (or stories about designers) who are so wrapped up in control over their design that they barely consider the client’s needs, let alone the needs of usability and accessibility. That’s unfortunate; since in the end, what your website looks like just barely registers for many visitors.
I sincerely believe (unscientifically) that most visitors only notice website design in one of three ways:
- The design prevents them from effectively using the site.
- The design is absolutely spectacular.
- The design is absolutely horrific.
Do you really want your design to be attracting attention? Certainly not for reasons numbers 1 and 3, and although the second reason is positive, it’s not necessarily best for every site. Incredible design doesn’t necessarily support your business in the best way; it could just get in the way. This can’t be decided universally, of course — - and it’s never a bad thing to strive for a great design.
It’s hard to ask questions about whether people noticed the design of a site. After all, it’s rather a quantum query: once you’ve asked, they will observe. The act of asking changes the experience of the visitor. Even in a usability test, it’s hard to identify this observation. Even though you can set up the scenario more effectively, if your testers are still aware that they are testing the site, they will tend to be more observant than otherwise.
You can’t TELL somebody to just “act normally” during a test, unfortunately. It doesn’t work that way….
Nonetheless, the rules I will work to avoid are clear: don’t make it horrible, and don’t let it get in the user’s way. Otherwise, what it looks like is open territory. I’ll try to make it look as good as I can, but if a client wants a change — - they’ll get it.
Working as a web designer/developer comes with a significant burden of responsibility. When you sign a contract to develop or update somebody’s business-critical web presence, you’re confronted with a situation where you have enormous potential to abuse or, through irresponsibility, damage that person’s business.
This is something I think about on an almost daily basis, thinking to myself “Have I taken the necessary precautions to make sure that THIS action doesn’t break anything?”
It’s a responsibility that goes far deeper than the relatively superficial issues of whether your design breaks in an 800-pixel wide browser window.
Read more: Responsibilities of a Web Designer
Just a quick announcement that I’ve updated my search script for Boolean matching in MySQL. The latest version is available for download on the PHP/MYSQL Search Engine script page.
The changes to this version include:
- Fixed: various minor bugs
- Fixed: multipage results not available with quoted strings
- Fixed: full-text query problem
- Fixed: some compatibility issues with different PHP/MySQL configurations.
- Added: sortable results
- Added: configurable field label names
- Added: sample results page
- Added: test mode for troubleshooting.
It’s not a massive update; but the script should be easier to use and more reliable.
This is not a technical article. You will not learn how to code AJAX by reading this; either in an accessible and usable fashion or otherwise. This is a conceptual article. It will run through basic user-interface issues with AJAX (and other rich media). These are the reasons that AJAX functionality can be a problem for users — - if you consider these issues carefully during development, it should greatly enhance the usability of your end product.
The basic limitations encountered with AJAX are threefold:
Best practice in any rich media format should always ensure that these three limitations are dealt with for all users.
Read more: Accessibility and Usability issues with AJAX
Return to Top
