Oh I'm with you there, Andy! I realised after I sent that email that
I could have put that better. I agree that the rate you charge is in
many ways a reflection of your knowledge and experience, and that
knowledge and experience can lead you to put in more effort in some
ways.
I still think, tho
Regarding charging - like anything, the more experienced you get the
faster you get so it's a bit silly to charge across a project on the
basis of time spent.
I agree with pretty much everything you've said apart from this.
Firstly I don't necessarily think that the more experienced you are the
*f
On Fri, 26 Nov 2004 15:57:29 +0800, Vicki Berry <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I rarely even mention web standards to clients anymore unless they are
Amen!
--
Kay Smoljak
http://kay.smoljak.com/
**
The discussion list for http://webstandardsgro
I rarely even mention web standards to clients anymore unless they are
govt or govt agencies. I agree that as someone paying a builder to
build a house for me, I don't need to know the pros and cons of a
certain type of mortar - just do the job and do it so it gets me the
result I want!
My pitch
On 11/25/04 7:00 PM "Jixor - Stephen I" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> sent this out:
> To be honest I don't understand how building using standards could cost
> more unless you simply don't know what your doing. Its really as simple
> as that, there is no extra work involved in using standards, if anything
What you are really getting at is not so much that you charge more
because you know about building accessible standards based websites but
because your experience is broader. For example you can say ...and
because the site is built this way it has such and such benefits to
vision impaired users
Yes, that is a good point, and is what I was getting at earlier:
you really need to tell the story of why your 'expensive' design is
so much better than you competitors cheap design
There is a joke (loosely paraphrased) about the plumber kicking a pipe
and charges $100 for it. When the bill is que
Something I think you all are missing is that you have taken time to
learn about standards and accessibility.
I think I can charge more for my services because I have more knowledge
about standards.
So for me the price may be more expensive - but they are paying for my
knowledege and experience
To be honest I don't understand how building using standards could cost
more unless you simply don't know what your doing. Its really as simple
as that, there is no extra work involved in using standards, if anything
its less work. Building using standards is a choice not an extra.
If you can't
Patrick you are right -- in and of itself flash satay doesn't improve
accessibility. But using the object tag properly does - which is what
the satay method uses (I use a variation with IE comments).
Example (accessible image map, but same principles apply):
http://developer.apple.com/internet/w
Terrence Wood wrote:
When I pitch for a site I don't talk about web standards and
accessibility per se - these are just methodologies I use to deliver
results. Web standards and accessibility are invisible to the untrained
eye.
I always liken this to something like the construction industry: if
Warning my response is long and perhaps rambles a bit -- there are the
beginnings of some nice ideas but it's lacking polish - I'm tired.
When I pitch for a site I don't talk about web standards and
accessibility per se - these are just methodologies I use to deliver
results. Web standards and
Bert Doorn wrote:
It's also frustrating to get emails with microscopic text (accessibility
issue). Text/plain please?
Both Thunderbird and Firefox allow you to set the minimum font size.
Accessibility fighting back!
As far as your dilemma goes - don't lower your standards (pun intended) for
t
john wrote:
I'm not sure I understand why it would cost more to use web standards.
Even if it did on the design and build, it would surely even out once
maintenance costs were factored in.
The problem isn't web standards or not web standards, the problem seems
to be quality vs cost.
If you do q
On Thu, 25 Nov 2004 20:40:10 +1100, Brett Walsh wrote:
> Searching for s2store in google returns it as the first result.?
No, the point is that there are no descriptions to entice the searcher
to click on that link and that of the many, many pages on the site
(have a look - its a fair sized site
on 11/25/2004 10:18 AM Bert Doorn said the following:
> It's also frustrating to get emails with microscopic text...
heh...I didn't notice that myself, since I have HTML turned off in
Thunderbird.
~john
_
Dr. Zeus Web Development
http://www.DrZeus.net
"content without clut
Original Message-
From: john [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: donderdag 25 november 2004 11:00
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: [WSG] It's so frustrating. Webstandars, accesibility and
Firefox as a sales argument.
As I'm just now starting to use web standards in my business, and hav
It's also frustrating to get emails with microscopic text (accessibility
issue). Text/plain please?
As far as your dilemma goes - don't lower your standards (pun intended) for
the sake of getting work. If you can't convince them, let them go. Maybe
they will come back when the site they get doe
On Thu, 25 Nov 2004 11:06:51 +0100, Kristof Rutten
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I totally agree. But then it comes to budget.
>
> And your clients ASKS why your offer is quoted higher. Then you have the
> explaining to do.
I don't really get why your quote should be higher and don't really
like t
ECTED]
Sent: donderdag 25 november 2004 11:00
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: [WSG] It's so frustrating. Webstandars, accesibility and
Firefox as a sales argument.
As I'm just now starting to use web standards in my business, and haven't
had to yet make the sales pitch, these
As I'm just now starting to use web standards in my business, and
haven't had to yet make the sales pitch, these are just some random
thoughts.
Why would we have to sell the idea of web standards? Why not just use
them? Sell your services like usual, and use all the tools you know to
create
te with a gazillion products just had
15 links
on a search engine? And Google is the most active of'm
all.
.K
From: Brett Walsh
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: donderdag 25 november 2004
10:40To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]Subject: RE: [WSG] It's
so frustrating. Webstandars, accesibility and
Kristof Rutten wrote:
How do you convince your client to spend a little more on the design,
the coding and the usability
when the most simple logic doesn't work ?
Remember that most clients don't care a jot about accessibility and web
standards. Sell them on the business benefits. However if the
Searching for s2store in google returns it
as the first result…?
From:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Kristof Rutten
Sent: Thursday, 25 November 2004
8:26 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: [WSG] It's so
frustrating. Webstandars, accesibilit
Hi
All,
I don't know
if you guys experience the same anoying and frustrating talks when it
comes
to convince
a prospect/client of the fact his/her site isn't working for most of the
world.
-- The fact
that it's not build following certain standards, the fact Google is like a
bli
25 matches
Mail list logo