Re: [WSG] New Windows
Ben, John has just posted an interesting piece about this... http://westciv.typepad.com/standards/2004/11/another_way_of_.html Actually it was Maxine :-) And it is a good little discussion of the practical issues John John Allsopp :: westciv :: http://www.westciv.com/ software, courses, resources for a standards based web :: style master blog :: http://westciv.typepad.com/dog_or_higher/ ** 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] New Windows
John has just posted an interesting piece about this... http://westciv.typepad.com/standards/2004/11/another_way_of_.html Overall though - I avoid them at all costs. When we recently rejigged www.toyota.com.au - the #2 thing that came out of usability research was the hatred users have for the prevelance of pop-ups on the site. -- Ben Webster Conversant Studios www.conversantstudios.com.au On Mon, 06 Dec 2004 18:37:58 -0500, Felix Miata <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Paul Novitski wrote: > > > At 11:11 AM 12/6/04, Felix Miata wrote: > > > >Fresh meat: http://www.useit.com/alertbox/20041206.html > > > Yes, but only 605 respondents?! Yikes, that's a small sample. Nielsen's > > I bet you'd never find a random sample that size that proves the > converse. > > > results, satisfying as they are to one allergic to commercialism, would > > carry more weight if the sample size were significantly greater. Perhaps > > someone blessed with a memory for statistical math can confirm how large a > > website-viewing population can be significantly sampled by just 605 > > respondents. > > Sometimes a REALLY small sample is sufficient. Check out Jakob's > apparent satisfaction with as little as 3-5: > http://www.useit.com/alertbox/20010204.html > > > -- > "I am the way, and the truth, and the life. No one comes to the > Father except through me."John 14:6 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 > ** > > -- ** 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] New Windows
Paul Novitski wrote: > At 11:11 AM 12/6/04, Felix Miata wrote: > >Fresh meat: http://www.useit.com/alertbox/20041206.html > Yes, but only 605 respondents?! Yikes, that's a small sample. Nielsen's I bet you'd never find a random sample that size that proves the converse. > results, satisfying as they are to one allergic to commercialism, would > carry more weight if the sample size were significantly greater. Perhaps > someone blessed with a memory for statistical math can confirm how large a > website-viewing population can be significantly sampled by just 605 > respondents. Sometimes a REALLY small sample is sufficient. Check out Jakob's apparent satisfaction with as little as 3-5: http://www.useit.com/alertbox/20010204.html -- "I am the way, and the truth, and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me."John 14:6 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] New Windows
Paul Novitski wrote: At 11:11 AM 12/6/04, Felix Miata wrote: Fresh meat: http://www.useit.com/alertbox/20041206.html Yes, but only 605 respondents?! Yikes, that's a small sample. Nielsen's results, satisfying as they are to one allergic to commercialism, would carry more weight if the sample size were significantly greater. Perhaps someone blessed with a memory for statistical math can confirm how large a website-viewing population can be significantly sampled by just 605 respondents. Responses from 1000 people, picked out / selected at random, is calculated to give an error of +/- 3% for a larger group of more than 100 millions. If you pick responders from the same, small, group over and over again, the error will slowly rise towards a useless +/- 50%. Even worse: if you get responses from a group of followers, then it is always biased and useless. One can always question any statistical results-- no matter how big a sample. One can even use statistics to prove the reverse, if one like to. Statistics based on samples are the most used and abused form of manipulation there is. Didn't see how those responses were filtered, but if there was any serious balance (statistically speaking) then the error should be less than +/- 10%. That would make a pretty strong case the way the numbers came out, but no one need to believe it. Statistics are almost as much fun to work with as xhtml and CSS... ...you can always get the result you want. :-) Georg ** 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] New Windows
At 11:11 AM 12/6/04, Felix Miata wrote: Fresh meat: http://www.useit.com/alertbox/20041206.html Yes, but only 605 respondents?! Yikes, that's a small sample. Nielsen's results, satisfying as they are to one allergic to commercialism, would carry more weight if the sample size were significantly greater. Perhaps someone blessed with a memory for statistical math can confirm how large a website-viewing population can be significantly sampled by just 605 respondents. Paul ** 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] New Windows
Fresh meat: http://www.useit.com/alertbox/20041206.html -- "I am the way, and the truth, and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me."John 14:6 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] New Windows
Paul Farrell wrote: > Firstly, should one force new windows? Following the principle of 'Let the > User' decide, I guess not. But, do the bulk of internet users know how to > open links in new windows or tabs ? Do they know they have a choice ? Should it matter how many do or don't? What about the fact that *any* do, or that not all remain forever clueless? see also http://www.useit.com/alertbox/20010204.html > There is also the scenario where the user may not be accessing the site in a > 'windowed' environment. Definitely. Plus those where it's useless even though technically possible. > Secondly, if one decides to open a link in a new window, is it an acceptable > practice so long as it doesn't hamper accessability ? > I have read an article on accessable popups/new windows at > http://www.alistapart.com/articles/popuplinks/, which illustrates how one > can go about it. > What are peoples' thoughts ? Same as Jakob's: http://www.useit.com/alertbox/990530.html http://www.useit.com/alertbox/9605.html They're rather old, and so fail to take into account technological change. Users now have at their disposal, by popular request, browsers capable of disallowing all new windows arising from links, or otherwise not done explicitly by the user. Failing to take this development into account means lost $$$. It's my computer. I decide if and when and where I will have a new window. Sites that think it OK to override my desire do NOT ever get a dime of my money for whatever they want to sell. -- "I am the way, and the truth, and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me."John 14:6 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] New Windows
Sorry, my apologies. It helps if I log in. > -Original Message- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Paul Farrell > Sent: Monday, 6 December 2004 10:25 AM > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: RE: [WSG] New Windows > > Is there a link to the archives on the WSG site ? > If not then maybe there should be one ? > > > > > I asked the same question a few months ago. I suggest you > check the > > archives. There was some good discussion. > > > > ~john > > _ > > Dr. Zeus Web Development > > http://www.DrZeus.net > > "content without clutter" > > > > > > > > > > on 12/5/2004 11:06 PM Paul Farrell said the following: > > > Hi All, > > > > > > Was after some opinions on forcing links to open in new windows. > > > > > > Hoping this isn't off topic. Not sure that its strictly > 'standards' > > > but more along the lines of accessability/usability, which > > go pretty > > > much hand in hand with standards anyway. > > > > > > I read lots of articles saying that popups/new windows are > > the scurge > > > of the internet and the root of all things evil, and so > have become > > > reluctant to use them. > > > > > > My question has a few parts: > > > > > > Firstly, should one force new windows? Following the > > principle of 'Let > > > the User' decide, I guess not. But, do the bulk of internet > > users know > > > how to open links in new windows or tabs ? Do they know > they have a > > > choice ? Can a site designer still wield some control ? > > > > > > There is also the scenario where the user may not be > accessing the > > > site in a 'windowed' environment. > > > > > > Secondly, if one decides to open a link in a new window, is it an > > > acceptable practice so long as it doesn't hamper accessability ? > > > > > > I have read an article on accessable popups/new windows at > > > http://www.alistapart.com/articles/popuplinks/, which > > illustrates how > > > one can go about it. > > > > > > What are peoples' thoughts ? > > > > > > Regards > > > Paul Farrell > > ** > 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] New Windows
Is there a link to the archives on the WSG site ? If not then maybe there should be one ? > I asked the same question a few months ago. I suggest you > check the archives. There was some good discussion. > > ~john > _ > Dr. Zeus Web Development > http://www.DrZeus.net > "content without clutter" > > > > > on 12/5/2004 11:06 PM Paul Farrell said the following: > > Hi All, > > > > Was after some opinions on forcing links to open in new windows. > > > > Hoping this isn't off topic. Not sure that its strictly 'standards' > > but more along the lines of accessability/usability, which > go pretty > > much hand in hand with standards anyway. > > > > I read lots of articles saying that popups/new windows are > the scurge > > of the internet and the root of all things evil, and so have become > > reluctant to use them. > > > > My question has a few parts: > > > > Firstly, should one force new windows? Following the > principle of 'Let > > the User' decide, I guess not. But, do the bulk of internet > users know > > how to open links in new windows or tabs ? Do they know they have a > > choice ? Can a site designer still wield some control ? > > > > There is also the scenario where the user may not be accessing the > > site in a 'windowed' environment. > > > > Secondly, if one decides to open a link in a new window, is it an > > acceptable practice so long as it doesn't hamper accessability ? > > > > I have read an article on accessable popups/new windows at > > http://www.alistapart.com/articles/popuplinks/, which > illustrates how > > one can go about it. > > > > What are peoples' thoughts ? > > > > Regards > > Paul Farrell ** 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] New Windows
I asked the same question a few months ago. I suggest you check the archives. There was some good discussion. ~john _ Dr. Zeus Web Development http://www.DrZeus.net "content without clutter" on 12/5/2004 11:06 PM Paul Farrell said the following: Hi All, Was after some opinions on forcing links to open in new windows. Hoping this isn't off topic. Not sure that its strictly 'standards' but more along the lines of accessability/usability, which go pretty much hand in hand with standards anyway. I read lots of articles saying that popups/new windows are the scurge of the internet and the root of all things evil, and so have become reluctant to use them. My question has a few parts: Firstly, should one force new windows? Following the principle of 'Let the User' decide, I guess not. But, do the bulk of internet users know how to open links in new windows or tabs ? Do they know they have a choice ? Can a site designer still wield some control ? There is also the scenario where the user may not be accessing the site in a 'windowed' environment. Secondly, if one decides to open a link in a new window, is it an acceptable practice so long as it doesn't hamper accessability ? I have read an article on accessable popups/new windows at http://www.alistapart.com/articles/popuplinks/, which illustrates how one can go about it. What are peoples' thoughts ? Regards Paul Farrell ** 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 **
[WSG] New Windows
Hi All, Was after some opinions on forcing links to open in new windows. Hoping this isn't off topic. Not sure that its strictly 'standards' but more along the lines of accessability/usability, which go pretty much hand in hand with standards anyway. I read lots of articles saying that popups/new windows are the scurge of the internet and the root of all things evil, and so have become reluctant to use them. My question has a few parts: Firstly, should one force new windows? Following the principle of 'Let the User' decide, I guess not. But, do the bulk of internet users know how to open links in new windows or tabs ? Do they know they have a choice ? Can a site designer still wield some control ? There is also the scenario where the user may not be accessing the site in a 'windowed' environment. Secondly, if one decides to open a link in a new window, is it an acceptable practice so long as it doesn't hamper accessability ? I have read an article on accessable popups/new windows at http://www.alistapart.com/articles/popuplinks/, which illustrates how one can go about it. What are peoples' thoughts ? Regards Paul Farrell ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list & getting help **
