Re: [WSG] Top Ten Web Design Mistakes - yeah, right!
The problem with testing has been argued about. The fact that Nielsen only surveyed his subscribers, most of whom are quite different from Joe User, probably provided different result than if more 'average' testing was done. However, I don't really think that's a bad thing. I think it's actually better that way. The greatest issue that I have with usability testing and such is that they rely on the flawed assumption that the users know what they want. Don't fool youself. From my experience, if you ask Joe User what an Office program should look like, he'll describe what MS Office looks like, and if you ask what a search engine should look he'll say (in more or less words) like Google. This happens a *lot* in linux, so much so that usability testing in linux essentially means 'trying to make it look like Windows'. Which is terrible because Linux is not Windows, and to try to make them the same would be a disservice to Linux. The same thing happens on the web (although less so). I read though the report and I saw this in serveral places. Particularly in the search section. Why does everyones search form need to be like Google's? Why do the search results need to be on a seperate page? Having a javascript search function that brough real-time result may lead to an increase in functionality (as long as you have a proper system set up for users without javascript). ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help **
RE: [WSG] Top Ten Web Design Mistakes - yeah, right!
-Original Message- From: Alan Trick [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, 7 October 2005 5:13 PM To: wsg@webstandardsgroup.org Subject: Re: [WSG] Top Ten Web Design Mistakes - yeah, right! The fact that Nielsen only surveyed his subscribers, most of whom are quite different from Joe User, probably provided different result than if more 'average' testing was done. Not neccesarily. It depends on what you're testing and how you're testing it. Depends on the needs of that user group compared with another. However, I don't really think that's a bad thing. I think it's actually better that way. What you're really looking at is comparing novice and expert users. Both are completely valid. What is important is that the user profile for example, 'expert' or whatever you define is compatible with the objectives of the evaluation. So if Nielsens objective was to elicit feedback from experienced users, and that's who he tested with, then it's the right way to do it. not neccesarily better. The greatest issue that I have with usability testing and such is that they rely on the flawed assumption that the users know what they want. Don't fool youself. From my experience, if you ask Joe User what an Office program should look like, he'll describe what MS Office looks like, and if you ask what a search engine should look he'll say (in more or less words) like Google. That's why a lot of effort is made to ensure that questions are phrased properly, don't lead the user etc. this is a huge subject and another conversation. Usability testing does not rely on the assumption that users know what they want. Mine doesn't anyway :) Have a great weekend everyone :) Lisa ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help **
RE: [WSG] Top Ten Web Design Mistakes - yeah, right!
-Original Message- From: Alan Trick [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, 7 October 2005 5:13 PM To: wsg@webstandardsgroup.org Subject: Re: [WSG] Top Ten Web Design Mistakes - yeah, right! The greatest issue that I have with usability testing and such is that they rely on the flawed assumption that the users know what they want. Don't fool youself. From my experience, if you ask Joe User what an Office program should look like, he'll describe what MS Office looks like, and if you ask what a search engine should look he'll say (in more or less words) like Google. During usability testing you will generally try to avoid this problem by phrasing questions differently. Instead of asking them straight out what the website/program/functionality should look like you observe them with what they have got and try to analyse areas where the users show difficulties. In some cases of course they will tell you: Google's search is much better than this - but in that case you have to find out what it is that makes the search better rather than just copying entire Google. I agree: users don't always know what they want. But they do know what they like and what they dislike, what they understand and what they don't understand. ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help **
Re: [WSG] Top Ten Web Design Mistakes - yeah, right!
Alan Trick wrote: The problem with testing has been argued about. The fact that Nielsen only surveyed his subscribers, most of whom are quite different from Joe User, probably provided different result than if more 'average' testing was done. Except, as has been pointed out, these results echoed older results. Those older results were obtained though a great deal of testing with average users. To put it another way, the experts have beed trained to know what bothers users and that's what they are reporting finding a lot of. ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help **
RE: Ouch- was: [WSG] Top Ten Web Design Mistakes - yeah, right!
Hi Terrence I try to avoid personal attacks and I thought twice before sending and once before the graphic designer attack. After sending it I realized I should have at least re-read the thing before hitting the send button. What I was referring to was this line: why you would search specifically for a date is beyond me. Do you really search alertbox in that manner? I just use the search box if I am after specfic content =) To avoid conflict and confusion this could have been better worded, just as my response could have benefited significantly by more thoughtful prose. Regardless of Jakob's web site, my point was that we shouldn't presume how someone is going to look at information and should try to offer the content as effectively as possible. Granted, we could use a span to wrap the dates and CSS to present them more attractively. This would create cleaner code and more flexibility in presentation. I think that would go way above Jakob's head. Placing this information in a table with title, date, summary, etc would be a nice alternative. I don't mean to judge you as a person or a programming. I meant to debate the concept of presenting information. Ted -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Terrence Wood Sent: Tuesday, October 04, 2005 5:25 PM To: wsg@webstandardsgroup.org Subject: Re: Ouch- was: [WSG] Top Ten Web Design Mistakes - yeah, right! Hi Ted, I'm not sure where you're coming from with this. I really don't see how my previous post connects to the bigger concept of what conscientious responsible web developer's should strive for, in fact I don't even understand what you by that. Should I take it that you consider me as not conscientious nor responsible, or if I'm not with you, I'm against you? My post was not a personal attack on Nick, nor was it dismissive of his POV. Admittedly, I got the impression he was struggling to come up with an example of how alertbox is difficult to use and perhaps that has tainted my message, but I was genuinely interested in whether he truely wanted to select his articles based primarily on date. I never said that date based scanning was irrelevant - I stated that, in this case, it was secondary to the title, and in fact pointed out what (in my view) the purpose of the dates were. I didn't design alertbox, obviously, so it's anyones guess as to how it is intended to be used, but I really sincerely believe that alertbox is about as easy to use as it gets. Surely, part of usability is pruning out the complexities of an interface? Less complexity, and fewer decisions to make, in theory, should make things more obvious and easier to use. And, surely one way to do that is by not trying to cater for every possible use case? I suggest that a scanning for single word pattern say, intranet, is far easier to do than scanning a variable date range (2000 or 2001) which is the minimum of two matches and twice the mental load. It's also easier to do using your browsers find function. Would you have tried to search the list by date prior to Nicks post, or were you using that as an excercise to see if it was difficult to get results? Did you search first for the word Intranet, and then the date, or the other way around (as Nick suggests you should be able to do)? Is publication in 2000 and 2001 the primary criteria, or is it more important that it concerns Intranets? Lastly, I wonder about the wisdom of taking cheap shots at graphic designers on a list frequented by designer types, such as myself... but maybe I'm being overly sensitive to criticism? kind regards Terrence Wood. Drake, Ted C. said: Hi Terrence I think your argument is against what we, as conscientious responsible web developers should strive for. Nick states he finds the list difficult to read. That is an honest reaction, frankly I agree with his analysis of a table would be better. But you defended the list by assuming a date-based scan of the items is not relevant. We should be providing information in the most compelling manner possible. A great web developer anticipates the many ways a person will look for and at the data and prepares the page accordingly. Sure, it's easier for us to dismiss people for not using the site as we anticipated. But those people are still called graphic designers. (Sorry, I went to art school and we always sought the cheap shot at the graphic designer students a floor below) Seriously, that is what usability and accessibility is all about. Make your content easy to use. Don't dismiss someone for wanting to use it differently. By the way, after looking at the original post, I did go through and look for dates. I was trying to look for one of his 10 best intranet posts around 200, and 2001. So the first thing I looked for was the years and then scanned by title. Luckily it was chronologically sorted. Respectfully Ted
[WSG] Top Ten Web Design Mistakes - yeah, right!
Somebody pointed out this article by our friend Jakob Nielsen to me: http://www.useit.com/alertbox/designmistakes.html Let's start with this little comment at the beginning: For this year's list of worst design mistakes, I decided to try something new: I asked readers of my newsletter to nominate the usability problems they found the most irritating. How useless is that?! People who subscribe to Jakob Nielsen's newsletter are *not* normal. They are people who show interest in Usability, people who have got an above average understanding of Website Structure and Web Standards. Just take the first two biggest mistakes: 1. Legebility (fixed font sizes, non-standard fonts) 2. Non - Standard Links (javascript, opening windows, ...) Sounds familiar? Of course - it's the kind of stuff Web Standards and Usability people love chit-chatting about all day long (including us here on the WSG list). But does it mean they are really the two biggest Usability problems around? I don't think so. Go onto the street and ask anybody who's not absolutely fanatic with Usability or Web Standards what they find is the biggest Usability problem. Will they answer Oooh, I am really annoyed that I cannot change the font-sizes in my Internet Explorer browser because the evil programmer has set it to a fixed font-size? No, of course they won't say that. Because it's not the biggest Usability issue in the world, even though Usability and Web Standards discussions might make you think that. If I went and asked my mom what is the biggest usability issue would she respond Oh, Andreas, I hate those javascript popup windows when I click links. They are sooo non-standard and really confusing. CRAP! Of course she won't, because it doesn't bother her as much. I am not saying these problems don't exist - of course they do. But I can guarantee you the public (our real users) would vote completely different on what bugs them about website usability than what subscribers to Jakob Nielsen newsletter do. Just shows how much value you can put into the content on useit.com. Well, just my two cents. Andreas. ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help **
Re: [WSG] Top Ten Web Design Mistakes - yeah, right!
Thank you Andreas, I had forgotten to read my newsletter from Jacob. As usual he hits the nails on the head. Another good article. And I thought I was normal...oh well. But that's only me 2 cents of course. Bruce Prochnau BKDesign Solutions Andreas Boehmer said Somebody pointed out this article by our friend Jakob Nielsen to me: http://www.useit.com/alertbox/designmistakes.html Let's start with this little comment at the beginning: For this year's list of worst design mistakes, I decided to try something new: I asked readers of my newsletter to nominate the usability problems they found the most irritating. How useless is that?! People who subscribe to Jakob Nielsen's newsletter are *not* normal. They are people who show interest in Usability, people who have got an above average understanding of Website Structure and Web Standards. Just take the first two biggest mistakes: 1. Legebility (fixed font sizes, non-standard fonts) 2. Non - Standard Links (javascript, opening windows, ...) Sounds familiar? Of course - it's the kind of stuff Web Standards and Usability people love chit-chatting about all day long (including us here on the WSG list). But does it mean they are really the two biggest Usability problems around? I don't think so. Go onto the street and ask anybody who's not absolutely fanatic with Usability or Web Standards what they find is the biggest Usability problem. Will they answer Oooh, I am really annoyed that I cannot change the font-sizes in my Internet Explorer browser because the evil programmer has set it to a fixed font-size? No, of course they won't say that. Because it's not the biggest Usability issue in the world, even though Usability and Web Standards discussions might make you think that. If I went and asked my mom what is the biggest usability issue would she respond Oh, Andreas, I hate those javascript popup windows when I click links. They are sooo non-standard and really confusing. CRAP! Of course she won't, because it doesn't bother her as much. I am not saying these problems don't exist - of course they do. But I can guarantee you the public (our real users) would vote completely different on what bugs them about website usability than what subscribers to Jakob Nielsen newsletter do. Just shows how much value you can put into the content on useit.com. Well, just my two cents. Andreas. ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help ** ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help **
RE: [WSG] Top Ten Web Design Mistakes - yeah, right!
-Original Message- From: Katrina [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, 4 October 2005 6:29 PM To: wsg@webstandardsgroup.org Subject: Re: [WSG] Top Ten Web Design Mistakes - yeah, right! If I went and asked my mom what is the biggest usability issue would she respond Oh, Andreas, I hate those javascript popup windows when I click links. They are sooo non-standard and really confusing. CRAP! Of course she won't, because it doesn't bother her as much. It's interesting that you say that, my mother complains of a pop-up when using www.yellowpages.com.au. I don't know it, I have Firefox:) That pop up for her is a major usability issue :) Sorry, I should have been a bit more specific with my mum's words: the problem I was referring to was Jakob's #2 Mistake: - Avoid JavaScript or other fancy techniques that break standard interaction techniques for dealing with links. - In particular, don't open pages in new windows (except for PDF files and such). I can see people complaining about un-called-for advertisement popups when they enter a website, but the fact that a link opens in a new window instead of the same? I can hardly see the general public putting that onto the top list of Usability Mistakes. ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help **
Re: [WSG] Top Ten Web Design Mistakes - yeah, right!
It's not very usefull to troll on anything, and definitely not on something useful as useit.com. Please enlighten us on how you managed to say things like: I am not saying these problems don't exist - of course they do. But I can guarantee you the public (our real users) would vote completely different on what bugs them about website usability than what subscribers to Jakob Nielsen newsletter do. Perhaps it'd make sense to mention what website usability issues that bug these users, rather than going by your gut feeling - atleast Jakob asked his subscribers. It'd be interesting to note how many people you asked about it before coming to the conclusion that he was wrong. I'm not a huge fan of Jakob Nielsen, but I don't really enjoy reading baseless arguments either. Let's not let our designer egos become a barrier in understanding users better. cheers, Prabhath http://nidahas.com On 10/4/05, Andreas Boehmer [Addictive Media] [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Somebody pointed out this article by our friend Jakob Nielsen to me: http://www.useit.com/alertbox/designmistakes.html Let's start with this little comment at the beginning: For this year's list of worst design mistakes, I decided to try something new: I asked readers of my newsletter to nominate the usability problems they found the most irritating. How useless is that?! People who subscribe to Jakob Nielsen's newsletter are *not* normal. They are people who show interest in Usability, people who have got an above average understanding of Website Structure and Web Standards. Just take the first two biggest mistakes: 1. Legebility (fixed font sizes, non-standard fonts) 2. Non - Standard Links (javascript, opening windows, ...) Sounds familiar? Of course - it's the kind of stuff Web Standards and Usability people love chit-chatting about all day long (including us here on the WSG list). But does it mean they are really the two biggest Usability problems around? I don't think so. Go onto the street and ask anybody who's not absolutely fanatic with Usability or Web Standards what they find is the biggest Usability problem. Will they answer Oooh, I am really annoyed that I cannot change the font-sizes in my Internet Explorer browser because the evil programmer has set it to a fixed font-size? No, of course they won't say that. Because it's not the biggest Usability issue in the world, even though Usability and Web Standards discussions might make you think that. If I went and asked my mom what is the biggest usability issue would she respond Oh, Andreas, I hate those javascript popup windows when I click links. They are sooo non-standard and really confusing. CRAP! Of course she won't, because it doesn't bother her as much. I am not saying these problems don't exist - of course they do. But I can guarantee you the public (our real users) would vote completely different on what bugs them about website usability than what subscribers to Jakob Nielsen newsletter do. Just shows how much value you can put into the content on useit.com. Well, just my two cents. Andreas. ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help ** ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help **
Re: [WSG] Top Ten Web Design Mistakes - yeah, right!
On 10/4/05, Andreas Boehmer [Addictive Media] [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: How useless is that?! People who subscribe to Jakob Nielsen's newsletter are *not* normal. They are people who show interest in Usability, people who have got an above average understanding of Website Structure and Web Standards. Believe it or not, people who design and build websites also do use the web from time to time. Sounds familiar? Of course - it's the kind of stuff Web Standards and Usability people love chit-chatting about all day long (including us here on the WSG list). But does it mean they are really the two biggest Usability problems around? I don't think so. Go onto the street and ask anybody who's not absolutely fanatic with Usability or Web Standards what they find is the biggest Usability problem. Will they answer Oooh, I am really annoyed that I cannot change the font-sizes in my Internet Explorer browser because the evil programmer has set it to a fixed font-size? No, of course they won't say that. Because it's not the biggest Usability issue in the world, even though Usability and Web Standards discussions might make you think that. Over the summer I was involved with the development of a major political site (mentions on CNN and in Newsweek, guest appearances by members of the US Congress, tens of thousands of people interacting and discussing, etc.). We had a very prominent address for sending complaints, bugs, suggestions, etc., and after a few days we ran through the emails and looked at the most common complaints. The text is too small was among the top three. The number-one complaint was the fixed width of the layout, which is number 9 on Nielsen's list. And we got an awful lot of bug reports from people who had trouble registering and activating their accounts (take another look at Nielsen's list, and you'll find that covered as number 7). -- May the forces of evil become confused on the way to your house. -- George Carlin ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help **
RE: [WSG] Top Ten Web Design Mistakes - yeah, right!
-Original Message- From: Prabhath Sirisena [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, 4 October 2005 6:33 PM To: wsg@webstandardsgroup.org Subject: Re: [WSG] Top Ten Web Design Mistakes - yeah, right! I am not saying these problems don't exist - of course they do. But I can guarantee you the public (our real users) would vote completely different on what bugs them about website usability than what subscribers to Jakob Nielsen newsletter do. Perhaps it'd make sense to mention what website usability issues that bug these users, rather than going by your gut feeling - atleast Jakob asked his subscribers. It'd be interesting to note how many people you asked about it before coming to the conclusion that he was wrong. Sounds like a challenge. I should start a poll of my own, then. :) My conclusion was based on the fact that in all the Usability Tests I have conducted so far I have hardly ever heard anybody mention fixed font sizes as their #1 mistake for a website. In fact, the only time I ever heard it mention was during accessibility tests with visually disabled users. Other than that users might mention font-size at some point, but according to my observations people focus on much more obvious things. Shocking design, unclear labelling of sections, inconsistent navigation and (as Katrina mentioned in an earlier post) unwanted popups would be amongst them. ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help **
Re: [WSG] Top Ten Web Design Mistakes - yeah, right!
On 10/4/05, Andreas Boehmer [Addictive Media] [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Perhaps it'd make sense to mention what website usability issues that bug these users, rather than going by your gut feeling - atleast Jakob asked his subscribers. It'd be interesting to note how many people you asked about it before coming to the conclusion that he was wrong. Sounds like a challenge. I should start a poll of my own, then. :) Sorry if I sounded like an ass - but seriously, I do think Jakob's got a few good points in his article. My conclusion was based on the fact that in all the Usability Tests I have conducted so far I have hardly ever heard anybody mention fixed font sizes as their #1 mistake for a website. In fact, the only time I ever heard it mention was during accessibility tests with visually disabled users. Other than that users might mention font-size at some point, but according to my observations people focus on much more obvious things. Interesting observation. I'm on a rather big resolution here, and even with quite ok eyesight, I need to enlarge the text size to keep from going blind. And at the uni, I often come across browser windows that have font size increased, especially on small monitors. It may not be the most bugging issue, but it does bug nonetheless. Shocking design, unclear labelling of sections, inconsistent navigation and (as Katrina mentioned in an earlier post) unwanted popups would be amongst them. You got that dead right :o) cheers, Prabhath http://nidahas.com ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help **
Re: [WSG] Top Ten Web Design Mistakes - yeah, right!
On 4 Oct 2005, at 9:05 PM, Andreas Boehmer [Addictive Media] wrote: How useless is that?! People who subscribe to Jakob Nielsen's newsletter are *not* normal. They are people who show interest in Usability, people who have got an above average understanding of Website Structure and Web Standards. Just take the first two biggest mistakes: 1. Legebility (fixed font sizes, non-standard fonts) 2. Non - Standard Links (javascript, opening windows, ...) yeah... it's a shame that 2 is featured in the top ten mistakes from 1999 and 1 is from 2002. It may well be that Jakob is preaching to the converted, but maybe you should poll some of your own users... you may be surprised by what you find. kind regards Terrence Wood. ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help **
Re: [WSG] Top Ten Web Design Mistakes - yeah, right!
Andreas Boehmer [Addictive Media] wrote: People who subscribe to Jakob Nielsen's newsletter are *not* normal. We're not? Gosh, I didn't know that... :-) They are people who show interest in Usability, people who have got an above average understanding of Website Structure and Web Standards. Sounds good -- especially if one is to create *usable* web sites. I am not saying these problems don't exist - of course they do. But I can guarantee you the public (our real users) would vote completely different on what bugs them about website usability than what subscribers to Jakob Nielsen newsletter do. Real users have a tendency to either 'like what they get', 'adjust to what they get' or 'quit using a particular site'. Result: we may have lost some users before any voting can take place, and end up with a skewed set of votes. Guess http://www.useit.com/ experience some of that too... Just shows how much value you can put into the content on useit.com. Which is quite a lot if you don't read it in isolation, really... Georg -- http://www.gunlaug.no ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help **
RE: [WSG] Top Ten Web Design Mistakes - yeah, right!
-Original Message- From: Prabhath Sirisena [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, 4 October 2005 6:59 PM To: wsg@webstandardsgroup.org Subject: Re: [WSG] Top Ten Web Design Mistakes - yeah, right! On 10/4/05, Andreas Boehmer [Addictive Media] [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Perhaps it'd make sense to mention what website usability issues that bug these users, rather than going by your gut feeling - atleast Jakob asked his subscribers. It'd be interesting to note how many people you asked about it before coming to the conclusion that he was wrong. Sounds like a challenge. I should start a poll of my own, then. :) Sorry if I sounded like an ass - but seriously, I do think Jakob's got a few good points in his article. Oh, I do agree that he has got some good points in his article: all 10 points are valid issues, but nothing we haven't really heard before. The problem I have is that he creates a list of the Top Ten Web Design Mistakes based on statistics provided by a very particular group of people. It's as if Paul Mc Cartney created a list of the Top 10 Best Songs Ever and only asked subscribers of the Beatles' website to give their oppinion. Guess what that list will look like? My conclusion was based on the fact that in all the Usability Tests I have conducted so far I have hardly ever heard anybody mention fixed font sizes as their #1 mistake for a website. In fact, the only time I ever heard it mention was during accessibility tests with visually disabled users. Other than that users might mention font-size at some point, but according to my observations people focus on much more obvious things. Interesting observation. I'm on a rather big resolution here, and even with quite ok eyesight, I need to enlarge the text size to keep from going blind. And at the uni, I often come across browser windows that have font size increased, especially on small monitors. It may not be the most bugging issue, but it does bug nonetheless. Yeah, completely agree. I guess what causes my anger is that there are some people who see Jakob Nielsen's website as the ultimate guide to usability and many might get the impression that fixed font sizes are the biggest usability problem with websites (and there are a lot of sites out there that make that mistake). This is plain wrong. There are much more pressing issues than that. Let's assume we went and converted all of the fixed font sizes into relative font sizes. On every website that exists. Would that make a huge difference to our web experience? Maybe a little, but not much. Now imagine we went and fixed the information architecture of all websites that exist. Content would be in the sections where we immediately expect it to be. Or we ensured there is a consistent navigation on all websites. Would that make a difference to our experience with the Internet? Most definitely. ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help **
RE: [WSG] Top Ten Web Design Mistakes - yeah, right!
-Original Message- From: Gunlaug Sørtun [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, 4 October 2005 7:09 PM To: wsg@webstandardsgroup.org Subject: Re: [WSG] Top Ten Web Design Mistakes - yeah, right! Andreas Boehmer [Addictive Media] wrote: I am not saying these problems don't exist - of course they do. But I can guarantee you the public (our real users) would vote completely different on what bugs them about website usability than what subscribers to Jakob Nielsen newsletter do. Real users have a tendency to either 'like what they get', 'adjust to what they get' or 'quit using a particular site'. Exactly. So for something to go onto the Top Ten List of Usability Mistakes for the general public it must be something that bugs them so much that they don't want to adjust to it. Is small font size one of them? I think most people adjust to it, even if they don't like it. Links that open in the same window - most of us are already accustomed to it, even if we don't like it. Major Usability Issues users cannot adjust to are: - Missing Information - Incorrect Information - Catastrophic Navigation - Websites that don't work - ... Ask a general person what they didn't like about a particular website and in the majority of the cases their answer will start with: I couldn't find... ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help **
Re: [WSG] Top Ten Web Design Mistakes - yeah, right!
On 4 Oct 2005, at 10:32 PM, Andreas Boehmer [Addictive Media] wrote: Major Usability Issues users cannot adjust to are: - Missing Information - Incorrect Information - Catastrophic Navigation - Websites that don't work - ... Ask a general person what they didn't like about a particular website and in the majority of the cases their answer will start with: I couldn't find... Navigation is way over rated, and don't get me started on drop down menus... is it any wonder that search engines are so successful? IA does indeed impact on usability (as does visual design and other considerations) but usability and IA are two different things. I think Lou Rosenfeld should publish a top ten IA mistakes. Jakob's first point is acutally about legibility and is not simply limited to font resizablity. kind regards Terrence Wood. ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help **
Re: [WSG] Top Ten Web Design Mistakes - yeah, right!
I agree with Andreas to the degree that he is really saying this is not THE Top Ten Web Design Mistakes of 2005 but rather Top Ten Web Design Mistakes of 2005 according to subscribers of a newsletter directed at people interested in Jakob Nielsen's views on usability. In that respect it's a bit like general browser statistics, interesting, but not really that useful. Unless you are building a site targeted at people interested in usability who also enjoy reading Jakob Nielsen's newsletters then these points are merely one of many that could appear in a checklist. I hate to do the all too common dig at Jakob Nielsen but I always find it amazing that useit.com has such standing when it is itself such an awkward and unattractive site to use. Anyway, in the end it comes down to what is relevant to the users of the site you are building. Nick ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help **
Re: [WSG] Top Ten Web Design Mistakes - yeah, right!
On 4 Oct 2005, at 11:30 PM, Nick Lo wrote: I always find it amazing that useit.com has such standing when it is itself such an awkward and unattractive site to use. unattractive, maybe... but awkward to use? kind regards Terrence Wood. ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help **
Re: [WSG] Top Ten Web Design Mistakes - yeah, right!
Andreas Boehmer [Addictive Media] wrote: Major Usability Issues users cannot adjust to are: - Missing Information - Incorrect Information - Catastrophic Navigation - Websites that don't work - ... Ask a general person what they didn't like about a particular website and in the majority of the cases their answer will start with: I couldn't find... Yes, I've heard that one quite often. Many of those responses continue with something like ...because I couldn't read the text properly. That's not so much about small fonts, but more often that the page/site isn't usable when user-options come into play -- not even when these 'options' are quite normal across browsers/OS'. These problem comes in so many shades and broken sizes that a ten-point list of mistakes would hardly touch them, and user-comments will reflect that. However, most of these 'design mistakes' can be put under 1: Legibility Problems, so I think J.N. got it about right. The solution in most cases is for the designer to allow for and test with usability and user-options in mind. Broken designs are not very usable, no matter the cause. - So, from a usability standpoint: don't narrow down these issues to a comfortable level for web designers. Collect and evaluate all available information, and put it to use when designing for _users_. Georg -- http://www.gunlaug.no ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help **
Re: [WSG] Top Ten Web Design Mistakes - yeah, right!
Much as I hate to... and I'm trying hard not to but ...yes awkward to use. Let me pick an example: http://www.useit.com/alertbox/ That enormous list of previous columns is visually very difficult to scan. It is chronological so if you are browsing for a particular date your eye must go in and out of the jagged right edge. If you are browsing for a subject the size of text minus enough line spacing, interspersed with bold links (why they are bold is not made clear, presumably popularity) and erratic descriptions. That data would surely display much more logically in a table headed Name, Description, Date. You could then scan down a column, e.g. for a date, much more rapidly and it would encourage a description for each column. Nick On 4 Oct 2005, at 11:30 PM, Nick Lo wrote: I always find it amazing that useit.com has such standing when it is itself such an awkward and unattractive site to use. unattractive, maybe... but awkward to use? kind regards Terrence Wood. ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help ** ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help **
Re: [WSG] Top Ten Web Design Mistakes - yeah, right!
On 10/4/05, Andreas Boehmer [Addictive Media] [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Somebody pointed out this article by our friend Jakob Nielsen to me: http://www.useit.com/alertbox/designmistakes.html I'm not one of Jakob's fans... but in my limited experience, text size is one of the few things that annoy people so much they actually complain. I've been involved with the Perth International Arts Festival site for the past four years and the most common recurring complaint we've had is the text is too small. Of course, after explaining how font-size adjustment works and explaining to people they've probably accidentally held down ctrl while scrolling their mouse wheel in IE, that problem goes away (and the user often thanks us for educating them on that feature). Almost every other complaint - and there are not all that many - are people commenting on the actual content not meeting their needs, or to do with linked sites we have no control over - in other words, nothing to do with the construction or implementation of the site itself. I think Jakob is probably quite spot on in this case. -- Kay Smoljak http://kay.zombiecoder.com/ ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help **
Re: [WSG] Top Ten Web Design Mistakes - yeah, right!
G'day Much as I hate to... and I'm trying hard not to but ...yes awkward to use. Let me pick an example: All I see is an overwhelming mass of links, even on the home page. But then, I'm just a casual observer who stumbled on the site as it was mentioned on the mailing list. It may be different for someone who went there looking for something this site has to offer (whatever that might be - I can't see it at a glance). Regards -- Bert Doorn, Better Web Design http://www.betterwebdesign.com.au/ Fast-loading, user-friendly websites ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help **
Re: [WSG] Top Ten Web Design Mistakes - yeah, right!
I had never been there until this thread popped and up and yes, you are correct, it's ugly. But I guess it's the content that makes it succeed? Buddy Nick Lo wrote: I agree with Andreas to the degree that he is really saying this is not THE Top Ten Web Design Mistakes of 2005 but rather Top Ten Web Design Mistakes of 2005 according to subscribers of a newsletter directed at people interested in Jakob Nielsen's views on usability. In that respect it's a bit like general browser statistics, interesting, but not really that useful. Unless you are building a site targeted at people interested in usability who also enjoy reading Jakob Nielsen's newsletters then these points are merely one of many that could appear in a checklist. I hate to do the all too common dig at Jakob Nielsen but I always find it amazing that useit.com has such standing when it is itself such an awkward and unattractive site to use. Anyway, in the end it comes down to what is relevant to the users of the site you are building. Nick ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help ** ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help **
Re: [WSG] Top Ten Web Design Mistakes - yeah, right!
Andreas Boehmer [Addictive Media] wrote: Exactly. So for something to go onto the Top Ten List of Usability Mistakes for the general public it must be something that bugs them so much that they don't want to adjust to it. Is small font size one of them? I think most people adjust to it, even if they don't like it. Why do you insist on making this that they don't like something they need to do? I adjusted for my aging vision by discontinuing my newspaper subscription. I didn't want to, but I had to. Now I read the web instead, where I have some considerable power to overcome tiny text. If you make it too difficult, I exercise the subscription cancellation counterpart, the back button, and never see your painful site again. At the very least, if I manage to determine somehow that your content is compelling, I simply turn off your styles completely. Major Usability Issues users cannot adjust to are: - Missing Information - Incorrect Information - Catastrophic Navigation - Websites that don't work - ... Fundamental to your last item is legibility, which brings focus right back to text size. The next last is just a subset of the last. The first two are about content, which can't be fixed by anything you'll find among web standards. -- Be quick to listen, slow to speak.James 1:19 NIV Team OS/2 ** Reg. Linux User #211409 Felix Miata *** http://members.ij.net/mrmazda/auth/ ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help **
Re: [WSG] Top Ten Web Design Mistakes - yeah, right!
Nick Lo wrote: I agree with Andreas to the degree that he is really saying this is not THE Top Ten Web Design Mistakes of 2005 but rather Top Ten Web Design Mistakes of 2005 according to subscribers of a newsletter directed at people interested in Jakob Nielsen's views on usability. In that respect it's a bit like general browser statistics, interesting, but not really that useful. Unless you are building a site targeted at people interested in usability who also enjoy reading Jakob Nielsen's newsletters then these points are merely one of many that could appear in a checklist. What it's like is a poll of professional drivers about the qualities of modern cars. Of course you're going to get a different perspective than one taken from the entire population of good, bad indifferent drivers. I'd prefer to make my automotive design choices by including such focused opinions, knowing where they came from, so that I can expect improved sales by those likely to also make respected purchasing recommendations to the less clued, and thus improved sales generally. -- Be quick to listen, slow to speak.James 1:19 NIV Team OS/2 ** Reg. Linux User #211409 Felix Miata *** http://members.ij.net/mrmazda/auth/ ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help **
Re: [WSG] Top Ten Web Design Mistakes - yeah, right!
Andreas Boehmer [Addictive Media] wrote: Oh, I do agree that he has got some good points in his article: all 10 points are valid issues, but nothing we haven't really heard before. The We'll only hear it less when heed is paid it, or when the gummint steps in to force it. Which would you rather have? problem I have is that he creates a list of the Top Ten Web Design Mistakes based on statistics provided by a very particular group of people. Indeed, those whose interest is in a usable web for everyone. What a novel interest they have. Let's assume we went and converted all of the fixed font sizes into relative font sizes. On every website that exists. Would that make a huge difference to our web experience? Maybe a little, but not much. No, because that's only half a fix, if that much. Many designers are already using relative sizes, but mostly 76% or 80% or some other non-100% undersize instead of just fixing with pt or px. Either way, most web page text IS presumptively too small, because it is set smaller than the UA preference. So, users use their defense mechanisms zoom and minimum font size to make it big enough, and most of such pages break, with hidden or overlapping content, because the designers didn't allow for it. -- Be quick to listen, slow to speak.James 1:19 NIV Team OS/2 ** Reg. Linux User #211409 Felix Miata *** http://members.ij.net/mrmazda/auth/ ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help **
Re: [WSG] Top Ten Web Design Mistakes - yeah, right!
Terrence Wood wrote: On 4 Oct 2005, at 11:30 PM, Nick Lo wrote: I always find it amazing that useit.com has such standing when it is itself such an awkward and unattractive site to use. unattractive, maybe... Beauty is in the eye of the beholder. Black on white without need to zoom works for me. :-) but awkward to use? But of course! You have to go to his home page to find out how to contact him. ;-) -- Be quick to listen, slow to speak.James 1:19 NIV Team OS/2 ** Reg. Linux User #211409 Felix Miata *** http://members.ij.net/mrmazda/auth/ ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help **
Re: [WSG] Top Ten Web Design Mistakes - yeah, right!
Andreas Boehmer [Addictive Media] wrote:
Somebody pointed out this article by our friend Jakob Nielsen to me:
http://www.useit.com/alertbox/designmistakes.html
Let's start with this little comment at the beginning:
For this year's list of worst design mistakes, I decided to try something
new: I asked readers of my newsletter to nominate the usability problems
they found the most irritating.
How useless is that?! People who subscribe to Jakob Nielsen's newsletter are
*not* normal. They are people who show interest in Usability, people who
have got an above average understanding of Website Structure and Web
Standards.
It's only too bad most web site designers are apparently not among them.
We wouldn't actually want most of the web to be easy to use, would we?
Just take the first two biggest mistakes:
1. Legebility (fixed font sizes, non-standard fonts)
Sounds familiar? Of course - it's the kind of stuff Web Standards and
Usability people love chit-chatting about all day long (including us here on
the WSG list).
Wouldn't be much to discuss if it wasn't a problem, would it?
But does it mean they are really the two biggest Usability
problems around?
Probably. It you can't read it, nothing else matters. Readability is the
most basic element of usability.
I don't think so. Go onto the street and ask anybody who's
not absolutely fanatic with Usability or Web Standards what they find is the
biggest Usability problem. Will they answer Oooh, I am really annoyed that
I cannot change the font-sizes in my Internet Explorer browser because the
evil programmer has set it to a fixed font-size? No, of course they won't
say that.
Actually what they say is why do most sites make the text so small?
Remember, most users don't know they can change the text size. Web
designers repeat it all the time, so it must be true.
Because it's not the biggest Usability issue in the world, even
though Usability and Web Standards discussions might make you think that.
If it's not the biggest, it's certainly right near the top. It you can't
read it, nothing else matters.
I am not saying these problems don't exist - of course they do. But I can
guarantee you the public (our real users) would vote completely different on
Find or take an unbiased, statistically valid, general poll population,
and make good on your guarantee.
what bugs them about website usability than what subscribers to Jakob
Nielsen newsletter do.
I live in the real world. People I work with complaining about too small
text outnumber those complaining about too big text at least 100:1. I
can't actually remember if I've ever heard anyone other than a web
designer or app developer complain about too big web page text.
At least when the worst designers could throw was font size=1 most
users had some likelihood to see, as font is relative to the defaults.
Since CSS, user defaults could be totally disregarded with 'body p
{font-size: 11px}', and user power was diminished. This modern version
ubiquity of too small text on the web is the reason why modern browser
makers have given surfers zoom, minimum font size, and stylesheet
disabling to use as defenses.
--
Be quick to listen, slow to speak.James 1:19 NIV
Team OS/2 ** Reg. Linux User #211409
Felix Miata *** http://members.ij.net/mrmazda/auth/
**
The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/
See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
for some hints on posting to the list getting help
**
Re: [WSG] Top Ten Web Design Mistakes - yeah, right!
* Felix Miata [EMAIL PROTECTED] [2005-10-04 11:25]: Andreas Boehmer [Addictive Media] wrote: Somebody pointed out this article by our friend Jakob Nielsen to me: http://www.useit.com/alertbox/designmistakes.html Let's start with this little comment at the beginning: For this year's list of worst design mistakes, I decided to try something new: I asked readers of my newsletter to nominate the usability problems they found the most irritating. How useless is that?! People who subscribe to Jakob Nielsen's newsletter are *not* normal. They are people who show interest in Usability, people who have got an above average understanding of Website Structure and Web Standards. It's only too bad most web site designers are apparently not among them. We wouldn't actually want most of the web to be easy to use, would we? I'm a programmer. I like UI concepts, and I want my software to be usable, but I'm a programmer and very comfortable with vi. Which is why I like programming for the web. There is a large and vocal usability community setting down guidelines, sharing the results of their usability testing, having major spats about seemingly little issues like text size. Can a Visual Basic programmer go to a listserv and say, please give me feedback on my design? It's unusual to have a platform where design, usability, and systems have and ongoing dialog. I make it a point to listen. -- Alan Gutierrez - [EMAIL PROTECTED] - http://engrm.com/blogometer/ ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help **
Re: [WSG] Top Ten Web Design Mistakes - yeah, right!
Nick Lo said: That enormous list of previous columns is visually very difficult to scan. It is chronological so if you are browsing for a particular date your eye must go in and out of the jagged right edge. The alertbox a title based listing not a date based one, hence why the title appears first, why you would search specifically for a date is beyond me. Do you really search alertbox in that manner? I just use the search box if I am after specfic content =) The list is arranged in reverse chronology because it makes more sense than an alphabetical listing, and the most current articles appear at the top (great for return visits). I'm sure dates are offered as a courtesy as opposed to a primary navigating device, perhaps so you can decide if the content is current/relevant or not, or so you know whats new since your last visit?. I think a three column table is overkill for a simple listing of articles. kind regards Terrence Wood. ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help **
Ouch- was: [WSG] Top Ten Web Design Mistakes - yeah, right!
Hi Terrence I think your argument is against what we, as conscientious responsible web developers should strive for. Nick states he finds the list difficult to read. That is an honest reaction, frankly I agree with his analysis of a table would be better. But you defended the list by assuming a date-based scan of the items is not relevant. We should be providing information in the most compelling manner possible. A great web developer anticipates the many ways a person will look for and at the data and prepares the page accordingly. Sure, it's easier for us to dismiss people for not using the site as we anticipated. But those people are still called graphic designers. (Sorry, I went to art school and we always sought the cheap shot at the graphic designer students a floor below) Seriously, that is what usability and accessibility is all about. Make your content easy to use. Don't dismiss someone for wanting to use it differently. By the way, after looking at the original post, I did go through and look for dates. I was trying to look for one of his 10 best intranet posts around 200, and 2001. So the first thing I looked for was the years and then scanned by title. Luckily it was chronologically sorted. Respectfully Ted www.tdrake.net -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Terrence Wood Sent: Tuesday, October 04, 2005 12:43 PM To: wsg@webstandardsgroup.org Subject: Re: [WSG] Top Ten Web Design Mistakes - yeah, right! Nick Lo said: That enormous list of previous columns is visually very difficult to scan. It is chronological so if you are browsing for a particular date your eye must go in and out of the jagged right edge. The alertbox a title based listing not a date based one, hence why the title appears first, why you would search specifically for a date is beyond me. Do you really search alertbox in that manner? I just use the search box if I am after specfic content =) The list is arranged in reverse chronology because it makes more sense than an alphabetical listing, and the most current articles appear at the top (great for return visits). I'm sure dates are offered as a courtesy as opposed to a primary navigating device, perhaps so you can decide if the content is current/relevant or not, or so you know whats new since your last visit?. I think a three column table is overkill for a simple listing of articles. kind regards Terrence Wood. ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help ** ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help **
Re: Ouch- was: [WSG] Top Ten Web Design Mistakes - yeah, right!
Hi Ted, I'm not sure where you're coming from with this. I really don't see how my previous post connects to the bigger concept of what conscientious responsible web developer's should strive for, in fact I don't even understand what you by that. Should I take it that you consider me as not conscientious nor responsible, or if I'm not with you, I'm against you? My post was not a personal attack on Nick, nor was it dismissive of his POV. Admittedly, I got the impression he was struggling to come up with an example of how alertbox is difficult to use and perhaps that has tainted my message, but I was genuinely interested in whether he truely wanted to select his articles based primarily on date. I never said that date based scanning was irrelevant - I stated that, in this case, it was secondary to the title, and in fact pointed out what (in my view) the purpose of the dates were. I didn't design alertbox, obviously, so it's anyones guess as to how it is intended to be used, but I really sincerely believe that alertbox is about as easy to use as it gets. Surely, part of usability is pruning out the complexities of an interface? Less complexity, and fewer decisions to make, in theory, should make things more obvious and easier to use. And, surely one way to do that is by not trying to cater for every possible use case? I suggest that a scanning for single word pattern say, intranet, is far easier to do than scanning a variable date range (2000 or 2001) which is the minimum of two matches and twice the mental load. It's also easier to do using your browsers find function. Would you have tried to search the list by date prior to Nicks post, or were you using that as an excercise to see if it was difficult to get results? Did you search first for the word Intranet, and then the date, or the other way around (as Nick suggests you should be able to do)? Is publication in 2000 and 2001 the primary criteria, or is it more important that it concerns Intranets? Lastly, I wonder about the wisdom of taking cheap shots at graphic designers on a list frequented by designer types, such as myself... but maybe I'm being overly sensitive to criticism? kind regards Terrence Wood. Drake, Ted C. said: Hi Terrence I think your argument is against what we, as conscientious responsible web developers should strive for. Nick states he finds the list difficult to read. That is an honest reaction, frankly I agree with his analysis of a table would be better. But you defended the list by assuming a date-based scan of the items is not relevant. We should be providing information in the most compelling manner possible. A great web developer anticipates the many ways a person will look for and at the data and prepares the page accordingly. Sure, it's easier for us to dismiss people for not using the site as we anticipated. But those people are still called graphic designers. (Sorry, I went to art school and we always sought the cheap shot at the graphic designer students a floor below) Seriously, that is what usability and accessibility is all about. Make your content easy to use. Don't dismiss someone for wanting to use it differently. By the way, after looking at the original post, I did go through and look for dates. I was trying to look for one of his 10 best intranet posts around 200, and 2001. So the first thing I looked for was the years and then scanned by title. Luckily it was chronologically sorted. Respectfully Ted ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help **
Re: Ouch- was: [WSG] Top Ten Web Design Mistakes - yeah, right!
Hi Terrence, My post was not a personal attack on Nick, nor was it dismissive of his POV. Admittedly, I got the impression he was struggling to come up with an example of how alertbox is difficult to use and perhaps that has tainted my message, but I was genuinely interested in whether he truely wanted to select his articles based primarily on date. I wouldn't say I was struggling at all. I would agree I was looking for a sensible, grown-up alternative to the kind of honest, gut-reaction that I get when I look at that site. I would say the poor visual quality does not encourage me to revisit the site when there are plenty of alternatives on the web that provide as good information that is also pleasant to use. Also for more perspective, I am interested in what Jakob Nielsen has to say. For example I just recently listened to an interview with him on ITconversations.com. So really what my reply to you was doing was actually stopping and trying to work out why I rarely visit his website. I never said that date based scanning was irrelevant - I stated that, in this case, it was secondary to the title, and in fact pointed out what (in my view) the purpose of the dates were. Well, I also had in my head the fact that in a dynamic site you can link table headers to sort their columns, which in this apparently static site was not an option, so I was probably thinking ahead a bit too much. In any case the point of the table was to have the user go, e.g.: I want to scan by title so I go down the title column, then across the description to see if the article was relevant, then to the date to see how up-to-date the information may be...or down the date column, etc. In other words using it exactly as a table is meant to be used. Oh and I didn't feel you were personally attacking me, Nick ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help **
