Re: [WSG] Recommendations for Usability sub-contractor; SEC=UNCLASSIFIED
Rather than just dissing someone else's contribution, why don't you come up with a viable alternative instead? On Thu, 01 Mar 2007 11:41:41 +1000, Tim [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Dear Sarah, I would not recommend that a government department employs anyone who does not themselves conform with W3C document validation or the requirements of the 1992 disability Discrimination Act. hiser.com.au don't seem to write validated documents and their home page is full of inaccessible forms with no fieldset of legend tags. http://validator.w3.org/check?uri=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.hiser.com.au%2F If validity and accessibility are cousins of useability then the whole family could be in trouble. If you do contact hiser insist on training involving W3C valid documents which are accessible, Tim Anderson http://www.hereticpress.com On 01/03/2007, at 11:53 AM, Nguyen, Anh MS wrote: Sarah, Why don't you contact 'Hitser' currently providing Usability training and also consultancy. Usability consulting includes: Accessibility evaluations Expert reviews Forms design Information architecture design Usability testing User interface design Wesite: www.hiser.com.au Contact: [EMAIL PROTECTED] or phy phone on 02 9954 8970. Regards Anh Nguyen -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Sarah Hughes Sent: Thursday, 1 March 2007 10:58 To: wsg@webstandardsgroup.org Subject: [WSG] Recommendations for Usability sub-contractor Hi, We are looking for someone reliable (and good) to subcontract Usability work out to. Can anyone recommend a company/business who could be suitable for on site work in the Canberra area? Thanks, Sarah *** 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] *** The Editor Heretic Press http://www.hereticpress.com Email [EMAIL PROTECTED] *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] *** -- Tyssen Design www.tyssendesign.com.au Ph: (07) 3300 3303 Mb: 0405 678 590 *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
Re: [WSG] Recommendations for Usability sub-contractor; SEC=UNCLASSIFIED
What a statement! Are we hear for W3C standards or fiction? ANyone touting for work here should be fairly subject to at least W3C validation tests! Or else! What are the standards? A viable alternative Validated W3C XHTML 1.0 Strict with multiple stylesheet options. http://www.hereticpress.com Tim On 01/03/2007, at 1:00 PM, John Faulds wrote: Rather than just dissing someone else's contribution, why don't you come up with a viable alternative instead? On Thu, 01 Mar 2007 11:41:41 +1000, Tim [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Dear Sarah, I would not recommend that a government department employs anyone who does not themselves conform with W3C document validation or the requirements of the 1992 disability Discrimination Act. hiser.com.au don't seem to write validated documents and their home page is full of inaccessible forms with no fieldset of legend tags. http://validator.w3.org/check?uri=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.hiser.com.au%2F If validity and accessibility are cousins of useability then the whole family could be in trouble. If you do contact hiser insist on training involving W3C valid documents which are accessible, Tim Anderson http://www.hereticpress.com On 01/03/2007, at 11:53 AM, Nguyen, Anh MS wrote: Sarah, Why don't you contact 'Hitser' currently providing Usability training and also consultancy. Usability consulting includes: Accessibility evaluations Expert reviews Forms design Information architecture design Usability testing User interface design Wesite: www.hiser.com.au Contact: [EMAIL PROTECTED] or phy phone on 02 9954 8970. Regards Anh Nguyen -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Sarah Hughes Sent: Thursday, 1 March 2007 10:58 To: wsg@webstandardsgroup.org Subject: [WSG] Recommendations for Usability sub-contractor Hi, We are looking for someone reliable (and good) to subcontract Usability work out to. Can anyone recommend a company/business who could be suitable for on site work in the Canberra area? Thanks, Sarah *** 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] *** The Editor Heretic Press http://www.hereticpress.com Email [EMAIL PROTECTED] *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] *** -- Tyssen Design www.tyssendesign.com.au Ph: (07) 3300 3303 Mb: 0405 678 590 *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] *** The Editor Heretic Press http://www.hereticpress.com Email [EMAIL PROTECTED] *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
Re: [WSG] Recommendations for Usability sub-contractor; SEC=UNCLASSIFIED
Mike Brown wrote: - we don't want to get into a debate as to which usability consultants are good or not, or even what makes a good usability consultant Sarah, usability standards conversations are a hot topic over at the evolt.org list. Regards, Barney *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
Re: [WSG] Recommendations for Usability sub-contractor; SEC=UNCLASSIFIED
Tim wrote: What a statement! Are we hear for W3C standards or fiction? ANyone touting for work here should be fairly subject to at least W3C validation tests! Or else! What are the standards? I have to back this. In my mind this is exactly what this list is for. If people can't go to the public Web Standards Group list for advice on standards, common sense is failing us. Regards, Barney *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
Re: [WSG] Recommendations for Usability sub-contractor; SEC=UNCLASSIFIED
On 01/03/2007, at 1:00 PM, John Faulds wrote: Rather than just dissing someone else's contribution, why don't you come up with a viable alternative instead? On 3/1/07, Tim [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: What a statement! Are we hear for W3C standards or fiction? ANyone touting for work here should be fairly subject to at least W3C validation tests! Or else! What are the standards? Please. Call the search for a usability contractor off-topic if you will, but it's perfectly possible to have completely unusable sites that are standards-perfect and accessible. That's why people do research into site structures, eyetracking, and loads of other things that have absolutely _nothing_ to do with what markup you are using. That said, validity can be a _part_ of usability (and certainly the only bit of relevance on this list) -- but if people are participating in this list, it seems an awfully odd place to have to convince them of the value of web standards. For the vast majority of users, web standards or not are completely transparent. Accessible and usable websites don't require the separation of presentation and content (yes, I have my riot shield handy) for the overwhelming majority of users -- which is, afterall, what usability testing is about (your testing is only as good as your tester sample). Good websites will accommodate all users, but my understanding of usability testing was that it's more concerned with broader architectural and interaction concerns than the technologies that drive these -- though of course the technologies will have an impact in certain cases. I guess I think this whole thread is off-topic more than anything... but maybe I missed something. By the way, what on earth is A viable alternative Validated W3C XHTML 1.0 Strict with multiple stylesheet options. supposed to mean? and what does that have to do with evaluating websites -- reeling off a list of technologies is not an applied usability solution, and bears absolutely no relation to the original question. ~a generally quite flame-retardant Josh who will hopefully resist touching this thread again p.s. I'm no list mod, but I still recommend responding directly to the OP about this. As Mike (who _is_ a core team member/mod) said, potential sub-contractor usability consultants in Canberra is of absolutely no interest to AT LEAST 96.1% of the list (assuming that _every_ member in Canberra actually cares... which they won't). -- Joshua Street http://josh.st/blog/ +61 (0) 425 808 469 *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
Re: [WSG] Recommendations for Usability sub-contractor; SEC=UNCLASSIFIED
Is the percentage of the list who might be interested an objective criteria, for an objective standard like W3C. AT LEAST 96.1% of the list (assuming that _every_ member in Canberra Coming to a town near you, a nip in the W3C bud time saves nine. Tim On 01/03/2007, at 11:12 PM, Joshua Street wrote: On 01/03/2007, at 1:00 PM, John Faulds wrote: Rather than just dissing someone else's contribution, why don't you come up with a viable alternative instead? On 3/1/07, Tim [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: What a statement! Are we hear for W3C standards or fiction? ANyone touting for work here should be fairly subject to at least W3C validation tests! Or else! What are the standards? Please. Call the search for a usability contractor off-topic if you will, but it's perfectly possible to have completely unusable sites that are standards-perfect and accessible. That's why people do research into site structures, eyetracking, and loads of other things that have absolutely _nothing_ to do with what markup you are using. That said, validity can be a _part_ of usability (and certainly the only bit of relevance on this list) -- but if people are participating in this list, it seems an awfully odd place to have to convince them of the value of web standards. For the vast majority of users, web standards or not are completely transparent. Accessible and usable websites don't require the separation of presentation and content (yes, I have my riot shield handy) for the overwhelming majority of users -- which is, afterall, what usability testing is about (your testing is only as good as your tester sample). Good websites will accommodate all users, but my understanding of usability testing was that it's more concerned with broader architectural and interaction concerns than the technologies that drive these -- though of course the technologies will have an impact in certain cases. I guess I think this whole thread is off-topic more than anything... but maybe I missed something. By the way, what on earth is A viable alternative Validated W3C XHTML 1.0 Strict with multiple stylesheet options. supposed to mean? and what does that have to do with evaluating websites -- reeling off a list of technologies is not an applied usability solution, and bears absolutely no relation to the original question. ~a generally quite flame-retardant Josh who will hopefully resist touching this thread again p.s. I'm no list mod, but I still recommend responding directly to the OP about this. As Mike (who _is_ a core team member/mod) said, potential sub-contractor usability consultants in Canberra is of absolutely no interest to AT LEAST 96.1% of the list (assuming that _every_ member in Canberra actually cares... which they won't). -- Joshua Street http://josh.st/blog/ +61 (0) 425 808 469 *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] *** The Editor Heretic Press http://www.hereticpress.com Email [EMAIL PROTECTED] *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
Re: [WSG] Recommendations for Usability sub-contractor; SEC=UNCLASSIFIED
Um ... as far as I know Hiser, as a rule, don't actually code sites - they try to focus purely on usability. Which I believe was Sarah's original request ... _ Advertisement: Amazing holiday rentals? http://a.ninemsn.com.au/b.aspx?URL=http%3A%2F%2Fwww%2Eninemsn%2Erealestate%2Ecom%2Eau%2Fcgi%2Dbin%2Frsearch%3Fa%3Dbhp%26t%3Dhol%26cu%3DMSN_t=758874163_r=HM_Txt_Link_Holiday_Oct06_m=EXT *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
Re: [WSG] Recommendations for Usability sub-contractor; SEC=UNCLASSIFIED
Ian Stalvies wrote: Um ... as far as I know Hiser, as a rule, don't actually code sites - they try to focus purely on usability. Which I believe was Sarah's original request ... It's still an awful indicator. Although I've seen a lot of Australian firms selling accessibility, and awards crediting it, and generally they don't seem to care much about validity (even to the level of lack of doctypes and encoding parameters). It's hard to give advice, based on this. If an awful-looking, ambiguously-coded page is there to advertise a usability consultant... I'd have to say I wouldn't trust them. What else do you have to go on? Regards, Barney *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
[WSG] Recommendations for Usability sub-contractor
Hi, We are looking for someone reliable (and good) to subcontract Usability work out to. Can anyone recommend a company/business who could be suitable for on site work in the Canberra area? Thanks, Sarah *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
RE: [WSG] Recommendations for Usability sub-contractor; SEC=UNCLASSIFIED
Sarah, Why don't you contact 'Hitser' currently providing Usability training and also consultancy. Usability consulting includes: Accessibility evaluations Expert reviews Forms design Information architecture design Usability testing User interface design Wesite: www.hiser.com.au Contact: [EMAIL PROTECTED] or phy phone on 02 9954 8970. Regards Anh Nguyen -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Sarah Hughes Sent: Thursday, 1 March 2007 10:58 To: wsg@webstandardsgroup.org Subject: [WSG] Recommendations for Usability sub-contractor Hi, We are looking for someone reliable (and good) to subcontract Usability work out to. Can anyone recommend a company/business who could be suitable for on site work in the Canberra area? Thanks, Sarah *** 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] Recommendations for Usability sub-contractor; SEC=UNCLASSIFIED
Dear Sarah, I would not recommend that a government department employs anyone who does not themselves conform with W3C document validation or the requirements of the 1992 disability Discrimination Act. hiser.com.au don't seem to write validated documents and their home page is full of inaccessible forms with no fieldset of legend tags. http://validator.w3.org/check?uri=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.hiser.com.au%2F If validity and accessibility are cousins of useability then the whole family could be in trouble. If you do contact hiser insist on training involving W3C valid documents which are accessible, Tim Anderson http://www.hereticpress.com On 01/03/2007, at 11:53 AM, Nguyen, Anh MS wrote: Sarah, Why don't you contact 'Hitser' currently providing Usability training and also consultancy. Usability consulting includes: Accessibility evaluations Expert reviews Forms design Information architecture design Usability testing User interface design Wesite: www.hiser.com.au Contact: [EMAIL PROTECTED] or phy phone on 02 9954 8970. Regards Anh Nguyen -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Sarah Hughes Sent: Thursday, 1 March 2007 10:58 To: wsg@webstandardsgroup.org Subject: [WSG] Recommendations for Usability sub-contractor Hi, We are looking for someone reliable (and good) to subcontract Usability work out to. Can anyone recommend a company/business who could be suitable for on site work in the Canberra area? Thanks, Sarah *** 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] *** The Editor Heretic Press http://www.hereticpress.com Email [EMAIL PROTECTED] *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
Re: [WSG] Recommendations for Usability sub-contractor; SEC=UNCLASSIFIED
I think best would be people reply to Sarah off-list, because: - we don't want to get into a debate as to which usability consultants are good or not, or even what makes a good usability consultant - those of us outside of Canberra have very limited interest in the subject :) Mike who, believe it or not, is actually on the WSG Core team *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
