Hi Matt,
Yes, Yes and yes to all your comments. If we could all work towards the
standard of 1024 x 800 would be a massive plus for all and a piece of
the jigsaw we can put a tick to in the box. I am a believer in
development more than many and had the great fortune to develop and
explore new ideas and concepts over the years.
But whilst we agree to these standards, I believe it is imperative to
ensure that the other parts of the jigsaw meet.
I have just checked ITV local for example and the service reports 170
errors in authoring as one example. The CNN home page in the new layouts
being discussed when printed falls way short in a cohesive and
understandable layout.
I believe that 1024 x 800 is the future way to go and as you have
rightly pointed out that many users view in this screen size. But at
present the peripheral aspects of the equation are not.
Regards
Alastair
Matt Barber wrote:
On Tue, Apr 1, 2008 at 12:49 PM, A Agutter Pineapple Blue
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Planning When Developing (Current Topic BBC Dimensions).
The current subject in the group is in relation to the display
dimensions. After years and years of research, the optimal size is 800 x
600 and you need to build to that size and standard.
The BBC needs to build 800 x 600 to ensure a starting point for cross
platform compatibility. Especially in relation to the little people and
our more senior members of the community who we must not forget who
suffer from sight.
These points are valid - But I am a believer in taking things forward,
and not getting stuck with 800x600 because the aforementioned research
says so... The name escapes me, I think it was on the BBC Blog, saying
that 95% of users are on 1024 and up. That's some research you can't
really ignore...
I agree fully that it's important to consider those with sight
problems, as well as all other difficulties that may stop them from
equally and easily accessing information on the Internet. But it is
also important in my opinion to consider this generation of Internet
users, and to become engaging, to embrace methods to carry stories
forward more effectively than text can itself, with mediums of sound,
video, and utilizing larger screens and processing power.
To say we need to stay behind to allow everyone to keep up, is similar
to saying we need to compress all our images to 16 colour because not
everyone has upgraded yet. (Bit of an extreme example, but it kind of
works right?)
Sure, accompany this new content with innovation to help users with
sight problems, by offering accessible pages, screen reader
compatibility, audio news and so on.
Offer closed captions to people with hearing difficulties, which is
already appearing on some BBC media - an awesome feature that I hope
rolls out to every video.
Are you saying that you like the change (moving forward in regard to
design and functionality etc.) but you would like to see more
compatibility be introduced? Maybe in the form of alternative
versions?
./Matt
-
Sent via the backstage.bbc.co.uk discussion group. To unsubscribe, please
visit http://backstage.bbc.co.uk/archives/2005/01/mailing_list.html.
Unofficial list archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]/
begin:vcard
fn:Alastair Agutter
n:Agutter;Alastair
org:RNCSA;Information Technology Marketing and Communications
adr:Flat 4, 82 - 84 Walpole Road ;;FAO Alastair Agutter;Great Yarmouth;Norfolk;NR30 4NG;United Kingdom
email;internet:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
title:Senior WWW Developer and Founder
tel;home:01493 300856
tel;cell:0796 820 9007
note;quoted-printable:-=0D=0A=
=0D=0A=
IBM Development Team=0D=0A=
Mozilla Development Foundation Project Owner=0D=0A=
BBC Back Stage Site Owner Member and Developer=0D=0A=
Microsoft Software Development Network=0D=0A=
Microsoft Programme Development Partner=0D=0A=
Sun Microsystems Parter=0D=0A=
Real Media Producer Programme Partner=0D=0A=
Institute of Legal Executives=0D=0A=
Netscape Dev Edge Team=0D=0A=
AOL Instant Messenger Development Partner
x-mozilla-html:TRUE
url:www.pineappleblue.net
version:2.1
end:vcard
