Re: [WSG] Story Boards
doing a project for my website development course. now, part of the requirements says that i need to create a story board to represent what content is to be displayed on each page. Hello Marvin, Could something like this possibly work for you? http://green-beast.com/autorun/ There are some in-use examples on the Summary page, one being a step-by-step CSS tutorial, another for a presentation, and a third being used to showcase some land. Is the application accessible to you? I tried my best to make it so but it was challenging. Respectfully, Mike Cherim *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
Re: [WSG] Story Boards
Molly has put up an example of methods to mock-up/storyboard: http://www.molly.com/2005/08/23/protoype-techniques-in-the-web-design-workflow/ James On 10/10/07, Mike at Green-Beast.com [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: doing a project for my website development course. now, part of the requirements says that i need to create a story board to represent what content is to be displayed on each page. Hello Marvin, Could something like this possibly work for you? http://green-beast.com/autorun/ There are some in-use examples on the Summary page, one being a step-by-step CSS tutorial, another for a presentation, and a third being used to showcase some land. Is the application accessible to you? I tried my best to make it so but it was challenging. Respectfully, Mike Cherim *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] *** *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
Re: [WSG] source order
On 10/10/07 (23:03) russ said: ../ snip /.. However, most people would agree that: 1. consistency across the site is the most important thing (changing the source order on different pages could cause a great deal of confusion). 2. if navigation comes before content, skip links are valuable for certain types of users. But for less experienced screen reader users, it seems clear that many are likely to find skip links a useful device for moving directly to specific sections of the page. An endless debate. And this is before opening up the other aspect of the debate... How source order affects Google rank :) Thanks to everyone for your thoughts on this. Oh, and as many correctly guessed, the article to which I was obliquely referring was indeed http://usability.com.au/resources/source- order.cfm -- I meant to cite the URL in the original post but it slipped through the net. There are merits to both sides of the debate, but after thinking it through and in light of the opinions offered here, I think that I'm going to go with the following principles: 1. Navigation before content in cases where navigation is modest (say, half a dozen items or so). 2. Content first in those cases where navigation is more voluminous and less clear cut (eg blogs, where there might be blogrolls or archive link lists of considerable length). (Georg: the article you cited was primarily discussing blogs rather than 'regular' sites. It made some interesting points though). 3. Skip links to permit jumping to content areas (main content and sidebar): definitely, and visible too as they can useful to mobile users. 4. The Google ranking issue is a tricky one, but the official google line is always 'design for humans, not robots', and if making your site as accessible as possible isn't designing for humans then I don't know what is. (Interestingly, a screenreader might be considered almost a grey area between 'human' and 'robot'). 5. And finally, as Russ pointed out, consistency is vital, but that is true of any site design, whether accessible or not. Thanks again to all who threw in their 2 cents. -- Rick Lecoat *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
Re: [WSG] Story Boards
hi Marvin I am trying to understand the task you need help with. Pardon my ignorance on matters relating to the HCI for the poorly sighted. Perhaps you could educate me on this while I try to help. From what you are saying, it sounds like you are making what I would call wireframes, which is to say a rough description of where the various elements will generally sit on a page, without all of the dressing, like colours, logos, branding, images and without describing the sizes of the text exactly. Is that what you are referring to as storyboards? The second question might be irrelevant but had you been able to see in the past? I only ask as I understand it is easier to describe visual conepts to those who lost their sight as opposed to those who never had sight in the first place. The former have a memory of what seeing was, making descriptions and analogies easier for the sighted to use as examples. We use Quark, InDesign and OmniGraffle for these tasks, but I am not sure what would work well for your computer interface. I would have thought that MS Word tables would be useful for this, as would HTML tables, perfect in-fact as you can conceive of, for example a three column layout and describe it well using tables. How is dreamweaver as an interface for you as I understand it is very good at manipulating tables in general. Is that a possible tool? It would also be helpful if you could tell us what your instructor found lacking, so we could address their concerns directly. Joe On Oct 10 2007, at 04:46, marvin hunkin wrote: Hi. doing a project for my website development course. now, part of the requirements says that i need to create a story board to represent what content is to be displayed on each page. Now sighted students, would draw navigation and story board diagrams. now, had to do this in word tables and tried html. but my lecturer is still not happy with what i have come up with. now, just wondering, is there any software, that might be able to represent the story boards for the four websites that i am developing for this semester. any tips, tricks, or any other similar experiences. let me know, if anyone been in the same position. unfortunately the guy who did start to develop an accessible text to speech drawing software, got his phd, and did not complete the project and still in limbo. he got to the third user tests, and then nicked off. he did this at Burkely University in Callifornia and the product was to be called Intercommunication Draw 2. okay, can you help out or give suggestions or how to resolve these problems? cheers Marvin. Join Lavalife for free. What are you waiting for? *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] *** Joe Ortenzi [EMAIL PROTECTED] www.joiz.com *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
Re: [WSG] London Meetup for people interested in an informal discussion around web standards
Joe, Great to see gatherings of like-minded folk all over the place. As a side note, have you heard about Pubstandards UK? http://www.pubstandards.co.uk/ Website has kind of died off, but they have a mailing list that has updates on meetings (Generally something on every week or so from what I hear, with Sub-standards). Some very interesting webby people get involved... For Australian Melbournites, there is also Pubstandards: http://www.pubstandards.org Karl On 10/9/07, Joseph Ortenzi [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: For the Attention of those of you in London, UK. WS Meetup London Group I hope this isn't an infringement of the mailing list. Apologies if I got it wrong. Sorry for the short notice but there has been a bit of an internal debate on the merits of letting you all know about this. For those of you who are not aware, there is a site called Meetup dot com that allows people to create a regular group meeting among people who wish to meet and discuss a topic. anything from books, television programs, games, etc. whatever your interests it helps you find others then start a group. For the past year or so there have been over 100 people who expressed an interest in joining a Web Standards Meetup Group and I managed to get a few dozen interested in joining these past weeks. There will be an inagural meeting of the Web Standards London Meetup Group TONIGHT for anyone interested in discussing issues around implementing Web Standards. This is in no way connected to WASP or Web Standards Group dot org and arose from my experiences in various meetups around London. The aim of this meetup is to have informal discussions or very short presentations (15 mins max) in a pub or coffee-house and to open the floor to informal discussions, support, sharing and commiserate. If possible I would very much like to help promote the WSG London branch through this. They don't seem to be posting their events on the webstandardsgroup.org site since July 2006, even though you get to join the London branch by joining WSG.org. Please visit: http://webstandards.meetup.com/130/ if you are interested in joining this group, which, as some have mentioned in the discussion, is not designed to supplant but instead to compliment the existing WSG.org. London group. http://webstandards.meetup.com/130/ == Joe Ortenzi [EMAIL PROTECTED] *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] *** *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
Re: [WSG] source order
Is there a prevailing wisdom in this matter? Content first? Or navigation first? This is a jury is still out issue since nobody has comprehensive data, just small studies and opinion informed by observation of a relatively small number of users. What I think we can say for sure: 1) No matter which way you go, be consistent across the site so users can learn how your site works and trust it to work the same way as they move through the site. 2a) Either way, include skip/jump links; but 2b) Include visible skip links where possible or use invisible-but-accessible skip links (ie. do not use display: none; to hide skip links as a very large number of users will never be able to access them). If they are hidden, try to make them visible on focus so sighted keyboard users can see them. 3) Use meaningful link text and a logical heading structure. Not only is this just good practice and good for SEO... the accessibility-oriented reason people say this is that some (many? most?) screen reader users don't actually read a page from top to bottom. They use features which extract all the headings or links into a list; read just that list then use that to jump around content. Once they identify that they're on the page they really need, then and only then will they read the whole page. I will no doubt be corrected for saying this - please note that I am not saying *all* screen reader users do this. Screen Reader users have habits which are just as varied as other web users. No two people use the web in precisely the same way - but overall trends and common approaches can be identified. Enough disclaimer? :) cheers, Ben -- --- http://weblog.200ok.com.au/ --- The future has arrived; it's just not --- evenly distributed. - William Gibson *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
Re: [WSG] source order
Ben, this is damn fine summary. kind regards Terrence Wood. On 11/10/2007, at 12:40 PM, Ben Buchanan wrote: Is there a prevailing wisdom in this matter? Content first? Or navigation first? This is a jury is still out issue since nobody has comprehensive data, just small studies and opinion informed by observation of a relatively small number of users. What I think we can say for sure: 1) No matter which way you go, be consistent across the site so users can learn how your site works and trust it to work the same way as they move through the site. 2a) Either way, include skip/jump links; but 2b) Include visible skip links where possible or use invisible-but-accessible skip links (ie. do not use display: none; to hide skip links as a very large number of users will never be able to access them). If they are hidden, try to make them visible on focus so sighted keyboard users can see them. 3) Use meaningful link text and a logical heading structure. Not only is this just good practice and good for SEO... the accessibility-oriented reason people say this is that some (many? most?) screen reader users don't actually read a page from top to bottom. They use features which extract all the headings or links into a list; read just that list then use that to jump around content. Once they identify that they're on the page they really need, then and only then will they read the whole page. I will no doubt be corrected for saying this - please note that I am not saying *all* screen reader users do this. Screen Reader users have habits which are just as varied as other web users. No two people use the web in precisely the same way - but overall trends and common approaches can be identified. Enough disclaimer? :) cheers, Ben -- --- http://weblog.200ok.com.au/ --- The future has arrived; it's just not --- evenly distributed. - William Gibson *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] *** *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
