Re: [WSG] Usability Accessibility Over Design?
Steve Green wrote: The http://www.fosterandpartners.com is not a good example at all. I can see at a glance that it violates at least three WCAG Priority 2 checkpoints, and that's without even looking at the code. Some pages violate Priority 1 requirements too. That's a shame because I really need stunning examples of accessible, standards-compliant design to show our clients what is possible. Steve Yes, you are right, of course. Not only that, but you can't resize the often small text in IE, AND the contrast of some of the pages is poor. However, it emis/em a good example of an organisation that has binned it's previous Flash set up and who is trying to achieve a similar 'prestigious' look using standards markup. I am sure that, in around12 months, this site will have it's problems ironed out and will represent excellence in current design. It's a trend setter. -- Bob www.gwelanmor-internet.co.uk *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
Re: [WSG] Usability Accessibility Over Design?
If it has poor usability its actually bad design, because design isn't just visual style. If visual style wins out over usability then its ALWAYS BAD DESIGN. There is no way around it... Unless this is some highly specialized site like a quirky flash game or something else that we are not concerned with here. If you can't work usability into the visual style that you have in mind then you need to step back and re-think the way you work. Accessibility shares many aspects with usability because not all accessibility concerns regard markup and features for highly impaired users. However generally for most accessibility guidelines following them will improve usability for your average user too. James Jeffery wrote: Good Evening. Does Or Should Design Out-Weight Usability and/or Accessibility? Ive been faced with a number of situations during development on a number of projects that has forced me make a choice you have all probably had to make Usability/Accessibility over design. I know Usability and Accessibility are very different subjects, but they are both just as important. The users experience should be a good one, its sort of like a shop keeper or store manager, he has to make sure both non-disabled and disabled shoppers are happy when shopping, otherwise they wont come back. The shop keeper also would have to try to make a disabled persons shopping trip a good one, because after all, disabled shoppers deserve the same access as non-disabled shoppers. Bringing it back to web development, personally i think that a disabled user deserves to browse the internet with the same level of support and access as non disabled users. And back to the question, should design come before Usability/Accessibility? Sometimes you can do both, such as Image Replacement, or you can offer visually impaired users a version of your site with high contrasting colors. But there are times when designers and developers do things either without thinking about disabled users or thinking 'Stuff them, i want my hi-end graphical interface on my site' or 'Stuff them, i have no time to make it accessible' or even 'Stuff them, the fonts need to me tiny so my design looks good'. There are many more possibilities for a developer/design to not bother or not choose accessibility first. My take on all this is basically, if you have to make a choice and there is no way around it, think about your users first, not yourself and what you want, because you are not the one using the site. There is often times when things are just not possible, people insist on hacking around it, which often causes more problems and needs more hacks. But if something cant be done, leave it out, and wait. In the past, with CSS1 a lot of things were not possible, which later became possible with newer versions. Web Standards, Accessibility and Usability needs to be put right at the top of the list, way before design. Focus on the users and the people, and it will help to create and bring the internet up to a better standard. Im not sure if there is a law in every country regarding Accessibility but there needs to be one. This is just my take on things, but i would love to know what everyone else thinks. I'm in the middle of writing an article for a magazine, some views from both ends of the scale would be great. Its an important topic i feel. Thanks Guys. *** 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] Usability Accessibility Over Design?
Ok i think some people have missed the point a bit, but its probably my
fault.
When i said design, i was referring to the hi-end graphical content. The
sites that are
there to amaze people and go 'how did they do that' which is they way alot
of people
seem to be heading due to convention.
A client generally knows nothing about anything, he tells you what he wants
and
expects the result. This is what im talking about. The clients see sites
with some
eye candy, and want something 'better' than that. If you give them a site
that looks
like, say the microformats site (which is a perfect example of the way
websites these
days should be) then there usual reply is ('Its boring, there isnt much to
it').
I understand it is possible to create some amazing sites with usability and
accessibility
at the front of the line, but the only people that know this are people like
you and me,
again a client knows nothing and 90% of them don't care.They just want what
they
asked for. If you question why his navigation fonts are very small, his
reply is something
like (becuase i need to fit them all on the one line so it dont look like
the navigation
is taking focus) and you cant really argue the point, because they dont
tend to listen.
I dont know what clients others have worked with, ive worked with some right
nasty
ones, they tell the designer onthe other end of the office how they want it,
if you attempt
to pick at it, they tell you there going to go elsewere, no i cant argue,
ill get the sack.
Tis why i said, if there was a law the client would have no choice.
On 8/15/07, Jixor - Stephen I [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
If it has poor usability its actually bad design, because design isn't
just visual style.
If visual style wins out over usability then its ALWAYS BAD DESIGN.
There is no way around it... Unless this is some highly specialized site
like a quirky flash game or something else that we are not concerned with
here.
If you can't work usability into the visual style that you have in mind
then you need to step back and re-think the way you work.
Accessibility shares many aspects with usability because not all
accessibility concerns regard markup and features for highly impaired users.
However generally for most accessibility guidelines following them will
improve usability for your average user too.
James Jeffery wrote:
Good Evening.
Does Or Should Design Out-Weight Usability and/or Accessibility?
Ive been faced with a number of situations during development on a number
of projects
that has forced me make a choice you have all probably had to make
Usability/Accessibility
over design.
I know Usability and Accessibility are very different subjects, but they
are both just as
important. The users experience should be a good one, its sort of like a
shop keeper or
store manager, he has to make sure both non-disabled and disabled shoppers
are happy
when shopping, otherwise they wont come back. The shop keeper also would
have to
try to make a disabled persons shopping trip a good one, because after
all, disabled
shoppers deserve the same access as non-disabled shoppers.
Bringing it back to web development, personally i think that a disabled
user deserves
to browse the internet with the same level of support and access as non
disabled
users.
And back to the question, should design come before
Usability/Accessibility?
Sometimes you can do both, such as Image Replacement, or you can offer
visually
impaired users a version of your site with high contrasting colors. But
there are times
when designers and developers do things either without thinking about
disabled users
or thinking 'Stuff them, i want my hi-end graphical interface on my site'
or
'Stuff them, i have no time to make it accessible' or even 'Stuff them,
the fonts need
to me tiny so my design looks good'.
There are many more possibilities for a developer/design to not bother or
not choose
accessibility first.
My take on all this is basically, if you have to make a choice and there
is no
way around it, think about your users first, not yourself and what you
want, because
you are not the one using the site.
There is often times when things are just not possible, people insist on
hacking around
it, which often causes more problems and needs more hacks. But if
something cant
be done, leave it out, and wait.
In the past, with CSS1 a lot of things were not possible, which later
became possible
with newer versions.
Web Standards, Accessibility and Usability needs to be put right at the
top of the
list, way before design. Focus on the users and the people, and it will
help to
create and bring the internet up to a better standard. Im not sure if
there is a law
in every country regarding Accessibility but there needs to be one.
This is just my take on things, but i would love to know what everyone
else thinks.
I'm in the middle of writing an article for a magazine, some views from
RE: [WSG] Usability Accessibility Over Design?
Hi,
IMHO I would like to add one important factor to this. Money.
From my experience, regardless of how pretty, wow, etc., a client wants
their site to be, what they're really saying to you is that they need it to
produce a load of money for them. Keep that foremost in mind when design
decisions are being made. An accessible, standards-based, semantic, and fully
usable website is worth its weight in gold. Ask the client how many users he
wants coming in the virtual front door and making a purchase. They'll
probably say everyone. However, they don't think of the multitudes of
physically challenged/disabled users also looking for their products. Guide
them in this direction. Explain to them how much more money they can make by
establishing an all-user friendly storefront. Boring? Last time I checked,
money wasn't boring.
If that doesn't work, then politely wish them a good day and congratulations
on eventually becoming their own best customer.
Kind regards,
Frank
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of James Jeffery
Sent: Wednesday, 15 August, 2007 12:27 PM
To: wsg@webstandardsgroup.org
Subject: Re: [WSG] Usability Accessibility Over Design?
Ok i think some people have missed the point a bit, but its probably my
fault.
When i said design, i was referring to the hi-end graphical content. The
sites that are
there to amaze people and go 'how did they do that' which is they way alot of
people
seem to be heading due to convention.
A client generally knows nothing about anything, he tells you what he wants
and
expects the result. This is what im talking about. The clients see sites with
some
eye candy, and want something 'better' than that. If you give them a site
that looks
like, say the microformats site (which is a perfect example of the way
websites these
days should be) then there usual reply is ('Its boring, there isnt much to
it').
I understand it is possible to create some amazing sites with usability and
accessibility
at the front of the line, but the only people that know this are people like
you and me,
again a client knows nothing and 90% of them don't care.They just want what
they
asked for. If you question why his navigation fonts are very small, his reply
is something
like (becuase i need to fit them all on the one line so it dont look like
the navigation
is taking focus) and you cant really argue the point, because they dont tend
to listen.
I dont know what clients others have worked with, ive worked with some right
nasty
ones, they tell the designer onthe other end of the office how they want it,
if you attempt
to pick at it, they tell you there going to go elsewere, no i cant argue, ill
get the sack.
Tis why i said, if there was a law the client would have no choice.
On 8/15/07, Jixor - Stephen I [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
If it has poor usability its actually bad design, because design isn't just
visual style.
If visual style wins out over usability then its ALWAYS BAD DESIGN.
There is no way around it... Unless this is some highly specialized site like
a quirky flash game or something else that we are not concerned with here.
If you can't work usability into the visual style that you have in mind then
you need to step back and re-think the way you work.
Accessibility shares many aspects with usability because not all
accessibility concerns regard markup and features for highly impaired users.
However generally for most accessibility guidelines following them will
improve usability for your average user too.
James Jeffery wrote:
Good Evening.
Does Or Should Design Out-Weight Usability and/or Accessibility?
Ive been faced with a number of situations during development on a number of
projects
that has forced me make a choice you have all probably had to make
Usability/Accessibility
over design.
I know Usability and Accessibility are very different subjects, but they are
both just as
important. The users experience should be a good one, its sort of like a shop
keeper or
store manager, he has to make sure both non-disabled and disabled shoppers
are happy
when shopping, otherwise they wont come back. The shop keeper also would have
to
try to make a disabled persons shopping trip a good one, because after all,
disabled
shoppers deserve the same access as non-disabled shoppers.
Bringing it back to web development, personally i think that a disabled user
deserves
to browse the internet with the same level of support and access as non
disabled
users.
And back to the question, should design come before Usability/Accessibility?
Sometimes you can do both, such as Image Replacement, or you can offer
visually
impaired users a version of your site with high contrasting colors. But there
are times
when designers and developers do things either without thinking about
disabled users
or thinking 'Stuff them, i want my hi-end graphical interface on my site' or
'Stuff them, i have no time to make it accessible' or even 'Stuff them
Re: [WSG] Usability Accessibility Over Design?
On Aug 14, 2007, at 6:07 PM, Andrew Boyd wrote: It is scary that people still make the distinction between “design” and “usability/accessibility/fitness for purpose”. Exactly! While “usability/accessibility/fitness for purpose” alone do not define good design, good design *must* encompass “usability/ accessibility/fitness for purpose”, and any design that fails to do so is not good. In case anyone missed it, there's an interesting and provocative discussion on the Adaptive Path blog: http://www.adaptivepath.com/blog/2007/07/17/why-usability-is-a-path- to-failure/ and http://www.adaptivepath.com/blog/2007/07/20/usability-and-failure-a- recap/ Andrew http://www.andrewmaben.net [EMAIL PROTECTED] In a well designed user interface, the user should not need instructions. *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
Re: [WSG] Usability Accessibility Over Design?
On Aug 14, 2007, at 6:14 PM, Philip Kiff wrote: ...you are not approaching the client-designer relationship in a way that means the customer is always right. You are rather approaching it from a perspective that the customer does not know what is right... The client is hiring you, presumably, because you provide expertise she does not possess. Obviously there is no call for being confrontational, but if the client is proposing design directions that are in fact contrary to her own best interests, aren't we ethically obliged to point this out and provide alternatives? No matter what the business of the site's owner may be, if the site is not accessible to, and usable by its *target audience* then the site will fail. And guess who's going to be blamed for that failure... Andrew http://www.andrewmaben.net [EMAIL PROTECTED] In a well designed user interface, the user should not need instructions. *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
Re: [WSG] Usability Accessibility Over Design?
James Jeffery wrote:
When i said design, i was referring to the hi-end graphical content.
The sites that are there to amaze people and go 'how did they do
that' which is they way alot of people seem to be heading due to
convention.
That's the visual design part of a visual design. Much like 'CSS Zen
garden' and with the same weaknesses as many visual designs there.
Visual design doesn't have to get in the way of overall design, but it
tends to.
A client generally knows nothing about anything, he tells you what he
wants and expects the result. This is what im talking about. The
clients see sites with some eye candy, and want something 'better'
than that. If you give them a site that looks like, say the
microformats site (which is a perfect example of the way websites
these days should be) then there usual reply is ('Its boring, there
isnt much to it').
Boring but informative.
You may have to add some eye candy - for the client, after the
usability/accessibility sides of it are in place.
Of course: too much eye candy may turn it into interesting, but not
worth a revisit, but a client who knows nothing about nothing may not
be aware of - or interested in - that part.
I understand it is possible to create some amazing sites with
usability and accessibility at the front of the line, but the only
people that know this are people like you and me, again a client
knows nothing and 90% of them don't care.They just want what they
asked for. If you question why his navigation fonts are very small,
his reply is something like (becuase i need to fit them all on the
one line so it dont look like the navigation is taking focus) and
you cant really argue the point, because they dont tend to listen.
All you can say to that is: Ok, but it can't be guaranteed to work like
that in any browser on earth, no matter who on earth creates or designs it.
You may of course be challenged to prove such a statement from time to
time, but that isn't hard if you know how browsers work.
I dont know what clients others have worked with, ive worked with
some right nasty ones, they tell the designer onthe other end of the
office how they want it, if you attempt to pick at it, they tell you
there going to go elsewere, no i cant argue, ill get the sack.
It's definitely hard to argue about quality under such circumstances.
Making a living in web design can be hard, and it isn't the browsers and
their bugs and limitations that add most to the workload.
Again, you may have to add some eye candy - for the client, after the
usability/accessibility sides of it are in place.
Tis why i said, if there was a law the client would have no choice.
Laws may easily act as limitations on an open web, so I don't think
there should be anything but sensible guidelines.
OTOH: there's no laws against creativity on top of a solid canvas
either...
regards
Georg
--
http://www.gunlaug.no
***
List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm
Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
***
Re: [WSG] Usability Accessibility Over Design?
Frank Palinkas wrote: IMHO I would like to add one important factor to this. Money. I would like to throw a spanner in the works here. There are cases where a client is as interested in PRESTIGE as he is in money. See, for example: http://www.habitat.co.uk/uk/main_uk.htm as a case where prestige/image is crucial to the business. However, if you want see an example where prestige is also crucial, but the designer has use compliant methods and passed 508 validation (at least) see: http://www.fosterandpartners.com/Practice/Default.aspx An excellent site! It is interesting to note that, 12 months ago, this site was Flash, with a poor html version as second choice. This is no longer necessary. Inspirational work! My point is that the client shouldn't need to know anything about the inner cogs and wheels. An experienced designer emshould em be able to give the client whatever he wants and (although often difficult and challenging) he can do this without sacrificing standards or accessibility. -- Bob www.gwelanmor-internet.co.uk *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
Re: [WSG] Usability Accessibility Over Design?
However, if you want see an example where prestige is also crucial, but the designer has use compliant methods and passed 508 validation (at least) see: http://www.fosterandpartners .com/Practice/Default.aspx I dont mean to pick on this website, but from looking at the source i can already see a few minor faults. Maybe there is a purpose, i dont know. But the navigation links should be within a list. There is an empty div for the divider, there are other methods to do the same thing. Anyway taking this back on topic. Ive seen a number of great replies to this message, its made me think a little more and before i write this article i best get back to the drawing board with some hard facts. And back to the point regarding laws, i cant see how they would create and major limitations, a law to say that a website must be accessible and follow the guidelines set wouldn't hold much back. Or some sort of convention so that disabled users can quickly find there way to the accessible pages. I will have a good hard think about this over the next day or so. Thanks All. On 8/15/07, Designer [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Frank Palinkas wrote: IMHO I would like to add one important factor to this. Money. I would like to throw a spanner in the works here. There are cases where a client is as interested in PRESTIGE as he is in money. See, for example: http://www.habitat.co.uk/uk/main_uk.htm as a case where prestige/image is crucial to the business. However, if you want see an example where prestige is also crucial, but the designer has use compliant methods and passed 508 validation (at least) see: http://www.fosterandpartners.com/Practice/Default.aspx An excellent site! It is interesting to note that, 12 months ago, this site was Flash, with a poor html version as second choice. This is no longer necessary. Inspirational work! My point is that the client shouldn't need to know anything about the inner cogs and wheels. An experienced designer emshould em be able to give the client whatever he wants and (although often difficult and challenging) he can do this without sacrificing standards or accessibility. -- Bob www.gwelanmor-internet.co.uk *** 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] Usability Accessibility Over Design?
James Jeffery wrote: However, if you want see an example where prestige is also crucial, but the designer has use compliant methods and passed 508 validation (at least) see: http://www.fosterandpartners .com/Practice/Default.aspx I dont mean to pick on this website, but from looking at the source i can already see a few minor faults. Maybe there is a purpose, i dont know. But the navigation links should be within a list. There is an empty div for the divider, there are other methods to do the same thing. Anyway taking this back on topic. Ive seen a number of great replies to this message, its made me think a little more and before i write this article i best get back to the drawing board with some hard facts. And back to the point regarding laws, i cant see how they would create and major limitations, a law to say that a website must be accessible and follow the guidelines set wouldn't hold much back. Or some sort of convention so that disabled users can quickly find there way to the accessible pages. I will have a good hard think about this over the next day or so. Thanks All. On 8/15/07, *Designer* [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Frank Palinkas wrote: IMHO I would like to add one important factor to this. Money. I would like to throw a spanner in the works here. There are cases where a client is as interested in PRESTIGE as he is in money. See, for example: http://www.habitat.co.uk/uk/main_uk.htm as a case where prestige/image is crucial to the business. However, if you want see an example where prestige is also crucial, but the designer has use compliant methods and passed 508 validation (at least) see: http://www.fosterandpartners.com/Practice/Default.aspx http://www.fosterandpartners.com/Practice/Default.aspx An excellent site! It is interesting to note that, 12 months ago, this site was Flash, with a poor html version as second choice. This is no longer necessary. Inspirational work! My point is that the client shouldn't need to know anything about the inner cogs and wheels. An experienced designer emshould em be able to give the client whatever he wants and (although often difficult and challenging) he can do this without sacrificing standards or accessibility. -- Bob www.gwelanmor-internet.co.uk http://www.gwelanmor-internet.co.uk *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] *** *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] *** Interesting that http://www.fosterandpartners.com/Practice/Default.aspx page passes the HTML validation but fails the CSS validation as provided by the W3C. The other pages on the site Also fail validation on HTML as well. I have yet to see a web page that is fully compliant with HTML,CSS,WAI that was appealing to the eyes let alone done with Macromedia Flash. *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
RE: [WSG] Usability Accessibility Over Design?
Explain to them how much more money they can make... Just how much can they make? Where's the proof? That's what they always ask and that's what we can't answer. There are no plausible case studies to support this. It's pure conjecture. Yes I do know about the Legal General case study but so many factors are involved that it is impossible to quantify the benefit deriving from the improved accessibility or standards compliance. They were also starting from a very poor base. And they don't necessarily want everyone to view their website. Marketers specialise in segmentation, meaning that they want to present the best value proposition for their target market. Their target market is rarely everyone, and for some products it may be a very narrow demographic. We're asking them to risk losing some of what they already have in return for an unquantifiable benefit. By contrast, we have nothing to lose. Is it any wonder they are sceptical? Steve From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Frank Palinkas Sent: 15 August 2007 12:14 To: wsg@webstandardsgroup.org Subject: RE: [WSG] Usability Accessibility Over Design? Hi, IMHO I would like to add one important factor to this. Money. From my experience, regardless of how pretty, wow, etc., a client wants their site to be, what they're really saying to you is that they need it to produce a load of money for them. Keep that foremost in mind when design decisions are being made. An accessible, standards-based, semantic, and fully usable website is worth its weight in gold. Ask the client how many users he wants coming in the virtual front door and making a purchase. They'll probably say everyone. However, they don't think of the multitudes of physically challenged/disabled users also looking for their products. Guide them in this direction. Explain to them how much more money they can make by establishing an all-user friendly storefront. Boring? Last time I checked, money wasn't boring. If that doesn't work, then politely wish them a good day and congratulations on eventually becoming their own best customer. Kind regards, Frank *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
RE: [WSG] Usability Accessibility Over Design?
The http://www.fosterandpartners.com is not a good example at all. I can see at a glance that it violates at least three WCAG Priority 2 checkpoints, and that's without even looking at the code. Some pages violate Priority 1 requirements too. That's a shame because I really need stunning examples of accessible, standards-compliant design to show our clients what is possible. Steve -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Designer Sent: 15 August 2007 13:20 To: wsg@webstandardsgroup.org Subject: Re: [WSG] Usability Accessibility Over Design? Frank Palinkas wrote: IMHO I would like to add one important factor to this. Money. I would like to throw a spanner in the works here. There are cases where a client is as interested in PRESTIGE as he is in money. See, for example: http://www.habitat.co.uk/uk/main_uk.htm as a case where prestige/image is crucial to the business. However, if you want see an example where prestige is also crucial, but the designer has use compliant methods and passed 508 validation (at least) see: http://www.fosterandpartners.com/Practice/Default.aspx An excellent site! It is interesting to note that, 12 months ago, this site was Flash, with a poor html version as second choice. This is no longer necessary. Inspirational work! My point is that the client shouldn't need to know anything about the inner cogs and wheels. An experienced designer emshould em be able to give the client whatever he wants and (although often difficult and challenging) he can do this without sacrificing standards or accessibility. -- Bob www.gwelanmor-internet.co.uk *** 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] Usability Accessibility Over Design?
That's a shame because I really need stunning examples of accessible, standards-compliant design to show our clients what is possible. Is there nothing on Accessites.org that makes the grade? -- 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] Usability Accessibility Over Design?
I am one of Accessites' partners, so I am very familiar with the Showcase. There are certainly some very good sites there, but in the 18 months or so that the site has been live only 5 have achieved the Classic rating and none has achieved the top rating of Timeless. The 5 Classic sites are very good for their respective purposes, but they still fall short of the 'stunning visuals' that both Accessites and our customer are looking for. There's no escaping the fact that you can create very engaging forms of interaction with Flash that you just can't achieve with W3C technologies. Steve -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of John Faulds Sent: 15 August 2007 22:57 To: wsg@webstandardsgroup.org Subject: Re: [WSG] Usability Accessibility Over Design? That's a shame because I really need stunning examples of accessible, standards-compliant design to show our clients what is possible. Is there nothing on Accessites.org that makes the grade? -- 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] *** *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
Re: [WSG] Usability Accessibility Over Design?
Andrew Maben wrote: On Aug 14, 2007, at 6:14 PM, Philip Kiff wrote: ...you are not approaching the client-designer relationship in a way that means the customer is always right. You are rather approaching it from a perspective that the customer does not know what is right... The client is hiring you, presumably, because you provide expertise she does not possess. Obviously there is no call for being confrontational, but if the client is proposing design directions that are in fact contrary to her own best interests, aren't we ethically obliged to point this out and provide alternatives? No matter what the business of the site's owner may be, if the site is not accessible to, and usable by its *target audience* then the site will fail. And guess who's going to be blamed for that failure... This is quite true however is not common practice. One of the problems many websites face is where they are positioned in an organisation. If it is the communication/publicity department, they probably see it as a campaign and possibly even the latest iteration/campaign. If it is the IT department they see it as an ongoing maintenance and support night mare - quickly becoming another legacy system. The reality is that websites provide a new way of business that impact on everyone from the telephone call centre staff (they will get more complicated calls) - information will be sought from the website. Ofcourse, everyone also has a view of what is good and bad graphic design. It is probably not worth fighting over the look which should be consistant with their printed style. Making the system usable is much more difficult - but you do need to identify objectives and performance indicators. see http://www.ramin.com.au/marg/performanceindicatorsforwebsites.html Marghanita -- Marghanita da Cruz http://www.ramin.com.au Phone: 0414 869202 *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
[WSG] Usability Accessibility Over Design?
Good Evening. Does Or Should Design Out-Weight Usability and/or Accessibility? Ive been faced with a number of situations during development on a number of projects that has forced me make a choice you have all probably had to make Usability/Accessibility over design. I know Usability and Accessibility are very different subjects, but they are both just as important. The users experience should be a good one, its sort of like a shop keeper or store manager, he has to make sure both non-disabled and disabled shoppers are happy when shopping, otherwise they wont come back. The shop keeper also would have to try to make a disabled persons shopping trip a good one, because after all, disabled shoppers deserve the same access as non-disabled shoppers. Bringing it back to web development, personally i think that a disabled user deserves to browse the internet with the same level of support and access as non disabled users. And back to the question, should design come before Usability/Accessibility? Sometimes you can do both, such as Image Replacement, or you can offer visually impaired users a version of your site with high contrasting colors. But there are times when designers and developers do things either without thinking about disabled users or thinking 'Stuff them, i want my hi-end graphical interface on my site' or 'Stuff them, i have no time to make it accessible' or even 'Stuff them, the fonts need to me tiny so my design looks good'. There are many more possibilities for a developer/design to not bother or not choose accessibility first. My take on all this is basically, if you have to make a choice and there is no way around it, think about your users first, not yourself and what you want, because you are not the one using the site. There is often times when things are just not possible, people insist on hacking around it, which often causes more problems and needs more hacks. But if something cant be done, leave it out, and wait. In the past, with CSS1 a lot of things were not possible, which later became possible with newer versions. Web Standards, Accessibility and Usability needs to be put right at the top of the list, way before design. Focus on the users and the people, and it will help to create and bring the internet up to a better standard. Im not sure if there is a law in every country regarding Accessibility but there needs to be one. This is just my take on things, but i would love to know what everyone else thinks. I'm in the middle of writing an article for a magazine, some views from both ends of the scale would be great. Its an important topic i feel. Thanks Guys. *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
Re: [WSG] Usability Accessibility Over Design?
My general school of thought is that usability is a product of good UI design and accessibility is a product of good coding practice. Of course UI design and coding overlap, in that they both impact both fields, so it is the job of the designer AND front-end developer to make things tick for as many users as possible. -- Australian Web Designer - http://www.blakehaswell.com/ *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
Re: [WSG] Usability Accessibility Over Design?
Thats an excellent read James, well first my name is MJ I never introduced myself before and just jumped in discussions straight so Hi I am from London and I work at http://www.biginteractive.co.uk/ as a frontend designer. Now back to the matter in hand , this situation is certainly is out of the designers / developers hand, its all up to the client and his/her target audience , company specifications, project brief branding etc, however developers could take that extra step to ensure quality and adherence to available guidelines in Usability / Accessibility. But end of the day if the client wants a specific design features which is for some reason can't be done while ensuring guidelines kept, I think developers are obliged to keep the client aware. On 8/14/07, James Jeffery [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Good Evening. Does Or Should Design Out-Weight Usability and/or Accessibility? Ive been faced with a number of situations during development on a number of projects that has forced me make a choice you have all probably had to make Usability/Accessibility over design. I know Usability and Accessibility are very different subjects, but they are both just as important. The users experience should be a good one, its sort of like a shop keeper or store manager, he has to make sure both non-disabled and disabled shoppers are happy when shopping, otherwise they wont come back. The shop keeper also would have to try to make a disabled persons shopping trip a good one, because after all, disabled shoppers deserve the same access as non-disabled shoppers. Bringing it back to web development, personally i think that a disabled user deserves to browse the internet with the same level of support and access as non disabled users. And back to the question, should design come before Usability/Accessibility? Sometimes you can do both, such as Image Replacement, or you can offer visually impaired users a version of your site with high contrasting colors. But there are times when designers and developers do things either without thinking about disabled users or thinking 'Stuff them, i want my hi-end graphical interface on my site' or 'Stuff them, i have no time to make it accessible' or even 'Stuff them, the fonts need to me tiny so my design looks good'. There are many more possibilities for a developer/design to not bother or not choose accessibility first. My take on all this is basically, if you have to make a choice and there is no way around it, think about your users first, not yourself and what you want, because you are not the one using the site. There is often times when things are just not possible, people insist on hacking around it, which often causes more problems and needs more hacks. But if something cant be done, leave it out, and wait. In the past, with CSS1 a lot of things were not possible, which later became possible with newer versions. Web Standards, Accessibility and Usability needs to be put right at the top of the list, way before design. Focus on the users and the people, and it will help to create and bring the internet up to a better standard. Im not sure if there is a law in every country regarding Accessibility but there needs to be one. This is just my take on things, but i would love to know what everyone else thinks. I'm in the middle of writing an article for a magazine, some views from both ends of the scale would be great. Its an important topic i feel. Thanks Guys. *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] *** -- http://www.Mjama.com *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
Re: [WSG] Usability Accessibility Over Design?
Web Standards, Accessibility and Usability needs to be put right at the top of the list, way before design. I won't argue with that but all of those things are generally a harder sell to a client than the more superficial aspects of a project like the graphic design. -- 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] Usability Accessibility Over Design?
Exactly the responses i expected. It is possible to get good Accessibility, Usability and Design, but usually you have to give and take for each or one of them. More often then not a website focused on good Accessibility and Usability generally lacks a 'hi-tech' design, not that any of that is a bad thing, it totally depends on the audience and client, just as someone previously said. Its not our fault or the clients fault, whatever the client wants he gets, i feel its because technology is slower then we are, we have not got the right tools for the job. A small part is because of some browser vendors that are making life harder for us, i mention no names ;) The client is the hard part. Sometimes they want something that you know is not going to be great on the Accessibility front, and you try to advise them, but they do not listen, so you then have to do the best possible. The same goes on the Usability side of things. I feel as developers and/or designers its our job to mold the future internet, If there was a law in every country with some strict accessible guidelines then at least the client would know that his site has to be up to scratch. On 8/14/07, John Faulds [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Web Standards, Accessibility and Usability needs to be put right at the top of the list, way before design. I won't argue with that but all of those things are generally a harder sell to a client than the more superficial aspects of a project like the graphic design. -- 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] *** *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
Re: [WSG] Usability Accessibility Over Design?
There's no reason to have to sacrifice on either end of the scale. Every document should start as a plain, accessible HTML document. If the information on the document is well organized and logical, its already usable. At this point, progressive enhancements on all ends can be used to integrate higher level interaction. Your first level of enhancements come in the way of the visual design, color choices, basic styles. The second level is where CSS is taken a step further and used to perform image replacement, hide things, etc. The third level is where javascript manipulates objects in the document, or adds things in that are not part of the original HTML document, like flash movies, etc... You can keep adding in this directionmaking a page as rich and interactive as you want. Usability...thats not guaranteed anymore than a good visual design, but it is certainly a result of all things coming together with the same goal in mind. Joseph R. B. Taylor Sites by Joe, LLC http://sitesbyjoe.com [EMAIL PROTECTED] John Faulds wrote: Web Standards, Accessibility and Usability needs to be put right at the top of the list, way before design. I won't argue with that but all of those things are generally a harder sell to a client than the more superficial aspects of a project like the graphic design. *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***begin:vcard fn:Joseph Taylor n:Taylor;Joseph org:Sites by Joe, LLC adr:;;408 Route 47 South;Cape May Court House;NJ;08210;USA email;internet:[EMAIL PROTECTED] title:Designer / Developer tel;work:609-335-3076 tel;cell:609-335-3076 x-mozilla-html:TRUE url:http://sitesbyjoe.com version:2.1 end:vcard
Re: [WSG] Usability Accessibility Over Design?
With plain HTML its accessible, if its done correct in the first place. Its the visual design which were talking about. Forcing the user to resize there fonts, or disable CSS or Javascript to be able to read a page is asking a bit to much from them. People are hacking away at there CSS and sometimes the HTML to make things perform which can dent the accessibility even more. Of course users can disable CSS and view the plain old html, but should they have to? Especially when there can be other ways around things. Its like saying non disabled users, here have the full version, disabled users, just have the html you can make do. Id hate to view plain html pages all day long. On 8/14/07, Joseph Taylor [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: There's no reason to have to sacrifice on either end of the scale. Every document should start as a plain, accessible HTML document. If the information on the document is well organized and logical, its already usable. At this point, progressive enhancements on all ends can be used to integrate higher level interaction. Your first level of enhancements come in the way of the visual design, color choices, basic styles. The second level is where CSS is taken a step further and used to perform image replacement, hide things, etc. The third level is where javascript manipulates objects in the document, or adds things in that are not part of the original HTML document, like flash movies, etc... You can keep adding in this directionmaking a page as rich and interactive as you want. Usability...thats not guaranteed anymore than a good visual design, but it is certainly a result of all things coming together with the same goal in mind. Joseph R. B. Taylor Sites by Joe, LLC http://sitesbyjoe.com [EMAIL PROTECTED] John Faulds wrote: Web Standards, Accessibility and Usability needs to be put right at the top of the list, way before design. I won't argue with that but all of those things are generally a harder sell to a client than the more superficial aspects of a project like the graphic design. *** 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] Usability Accessibility Over Design?
I know it seems like im comparing the web to the real world, but nowerdays the web is a part of the real world. If you were to give disabled users second best in the real world and not offer them the same experience and non disabled people i tell you there would be hell breaking loose. Especially here in the UK anyway. On 8/14/07, James Jeffery [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: With plain HTML its accessible, if its done correct in the first place. Its the visual design which were talking about. Forcing the user to resize there fonts, or disable CSS or Javascript to be able to read a page is asking a bit to much from them. People are hacking away at there CSS and sometimes the HTML to make things perform which can dent the accessibility even more. Of course users can disable CSS and view the plain old html, but should they have to? Especially when there can be other ways around things. Its like saying non disabled users, here have the full version, disabled users, just have the html you can make do. Id hate to view plain html pages all day long. On 8/14/07, Joseph Taylor [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: There's no reason to have to sacrifice on either end of the scale. Every document should start as a plain, accessible HTML document. If the information on the document is well organized and logical, its already usable. At this point, progressive enhancements on all ends can be used to integrate higher level interaction. Your first level of enhancements come in the way of the visual design, color choices, basic styles. The second level is where CSS is taken a step further and used to perform image replacement, hide things, etc. The third level is where javascript manipulates objects in the document, or adds things in that are not part of the original HTML document, like flash movies, etc... You can keep adding in this directionmaking a page as rich and interactive as you want. Usability...thats not guaranteed anymore than a good visual design, but it is certainly a result of all things coming together with the same goal in mind. Joseph R. B. Taylor Sites by Joe, LLC http://sitesbyjoe.com [EMAIL PROTECTED] John Faulds wrote: Web Standards, Accessibility and Usability needs to be put right at the top of the list, way before design. I won't argue with that but all of those things are generally a harder sell to a client than the more superficial aspects of a project like the graphic design. *** 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] Usability Accessibility Over Design?
I would like to agree with you Joe but I currently have a battle with several design agencies who work for a multinational client of ours. Historically they have produced websites that are predominantly Flash-based or sliced and diced from PhotoShop. Our client wants to achieve WCAG AA and the agencies are saying it will affect the visuals, which I can't disagree with. Graphical representations of text are used throughout because virtually all the text is in fonts that browsers don't support and has visual effects that cannot be achieved using CSS (sIFR is not an option for this quantity of text). The colour contrast is subtle (i.e. low). There is continuous movement, audio that plays immediately on page loading and all kinds of whizzy stuff. The overall effect is fantastic for most users but it simply isn't possible to achieve the level of accessibility the client wants without making compromises. I so wish it was otherwise because this is a battle I don't want to have. Steve -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Joseph Taylor Sent: 14 August 2007 15:33 To: wsg@webstandardsgroup.org Subject: Re: [WSG] Usability Accessibility Over Design? There's no reason to have to sacrifice on either end of the scale. Every document should start as a plain, accessible HTML document. If the information on the document is well organized and logical, its already usable. At this point, progressive enhancements on all ends can be used to integrate higher level interaction. Your first level of enhancements come in the way of the visual design, color choices, basic styles. The second level is where CSS is taken a step further and used to perform image replacement, hide things, etc. The third level is where javascript manipulates objects in the document, or adds things in that are not part of the original HTML document, like flash movies, etc... You can keep adding in this directionmaking a page as rich and interactive as you want. Usability...thats not guaranteed anymore than a good visual design, but it is certainly a result of all things coming together with the same goal in mind. Joseph R. B. Taylor Sites by Joe, LLC http://sitesbyjoe.com [EMAIL PROTECTED] John Faulds wrote: Web Standards, Accessibility and Usability needs to be put right at the top of the list, way before design. I won't argue with that but all of those things are generally a harder sell to a client than the more superficial aspects of a project like the graphic design. *** 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] Usability Accessibility Over Design?
Joseph Taylor wrote: Every document should start as a plain, accessible HTML document. That's true -- for *documents*. But many web sites these days are *applications*, not collections of static documents. Web applications represent a significantly different design problem, particularly in terms of accessibility. -- Hassan Schroeder - [EMAIL PROTECTED] Webtuitive Design === (+1) 408-938-0567 === http://webtuitive.com dream. code. *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
Re: [WSG] Usability Accessibility Over Design?
Why should the client be the hard part of usability or accessibility? As a web designer/developer, its my job to create the accessible version whether they consciously desire it or not simply because I know it should be built that way and it is my desire to build it properly. Its also my job as a web designer/developer to tell them what the best way to do something since I am the experienced and talented designer they hired to do just that. I'm not afraid to argue a point if it will serve the best interest of a project. I personally take the liberty in my initial meetings to explain what my overall stance and level of passion are on design an development, so the client understands that my ultimate goal is to create the best way to do something in a way everyone can use on some level. As you said, its our job to mold the way sites continue to be built, but perhaps more so its up to designers who don't serve any design desire but their own when it comes to the craft, simply because thats the way it should be done. I could wait until the law requires me to do my job right, or I could just do it the right way now. Each website is just as much mine as the clients, and I'll be damned if I'm going to publish rubbish. Joseph R. B. Taylor Sites by Joe, LLC http://sitesbyjoe.com [EMAIL PROTECTED] Joseph Taylor wrote: Exactly the responses i expected. It is possible to get good Accessibility, Usability and Design, but usually you have to give and take for each or one of them. More often then not a website focused on good Accessibility and Usability generally lacks a 'hi-tech' design, not that any of that is a bad thing, it totally depends on the audience and client, just as someone previously said. Its not our fault or the clients fault, whatever the client wants he gets, i feel its because technology is slower then we are, we have not got the right tools for the job. A small part is because of some browser vendors that are making life harder for us, i mention no names ;) The client is the hard part. Sometimes they want something that you know is not going to be great on the Accessibility front, and you try to advise them, but they do not listen, so you then have to do the best possible. The same goes on the Usability side of things. I feel as developers and/or designers its our job to mold the future internet, If there was a law in every country with some strict accessible guidelines then at least the client would know that his site has to be up to scratch. On 8/14/07, * John Faulds* [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Web Standards, Accessibility and Usability needs to be put right at the top of the list, way before design. I won't argue with that but all of those things are generally a harder sell to a client than the more superficial aspects of a project like the graphic design. -- Tyssen Design www.tyssendesign.com.au http://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 http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] *** *** 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] ***begin:vcard fn:Joseph Taylor n:Taylor;Joseph org:Sites by Joe, LLC adr:;;408 Route 47 South;Cape May Court House;NJ;08210;USA email;internet:[EMAIL PROTECTED] title:Designer / Developer tel;work:609-335-3076 tel;cell:609-335-3076 x-mozilla-html:TRUE url:http://sitesbyjoe.com version:2.1 end:vcard
Re: [WSG] Usability Accessibility Over Design?
Hi James, On 14 Aug 2007, at 13:43, James Jeffery wrote: Web Standards, Accessibility and Usability needs to be put right at the top of the list, way before design. Focus on the users and the people, and it will help to create and bring the internet up to a better standard. I agree wholeheartedly with this. The point of design (as opposed to art) is that it is a functional artform. If it doesn't do the job it's enlisted to do (generally, to encourage people to use the site to whatever end by making it possible and enjoyable for them to do so), then it's a poor design and should therefore be changed. I'm not saying there isn't a place for good-looking websites - on the contrary - just that a good design is one which both achieves its purpose (usability/accessibility = increased visitors/sales/happiness/ whatever) AND looks good while doing it. It's possible, but many designers need to be a little more informed and a little more flexible. It doesn't matter how good pale grey text on a white background looks if no-one can read what it says. Stick it on the wall of an art gallery though and I'll cheer :-) Just some thoughts... C. Caitlin Rowley, B. Mus. (Hons), Gr. Dip. Design Composer, musicologist, web designer http://www.minim-media.com/listen/ *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
Re: [WSG] Usability Accessibility Over Design?
You've got an interesting point, Steve. Transitioning from non-accessible websites to accessible websites seems like it would require some sacrifice in look and feel. In fact, I was prone to thinking the same thing, but check out http://www.zeldman.com. You see that he's using images in the navigation, but when you disabled the styles these turn into text links. I haven't ever used this technique, but doesn't that achieve what you're talking about? Even if this whole text link with CSS images is too complex, it seems like the web is going away from graphical representations of text in general. What you lose in graphics, you gain back in SEO and accessibility - that's an easy way to pitch it to a client. Besides, CSS can do some stunning things with text. A good example is http://www.particletree.com - the only images on that page are with a specific purpose, and not to replace text. Also, I'd question you in saying that continuous movement, audio that loads automatically, and whizzy stuff is enhancing to the user experience. Honestly, I'm more prone to turn off a site with these features, especially the audio that plays automatically - when you reload the site, it reloads the audio, and that's just annoying :) Have you gotten feedback that this is positive, or is it just what the client wants? -Tim www.timpalac.com On 8/14/07, Steve Green [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I would like to agree with you Joe but I currently have a battle with several design agencies who work for a multinational client of ours. Historically they have produced websites that are predominantly Flash-based or sliced and diced from PhotoShop. Our client wants to achieve WCAG AA and the agencies are saying it will affect the visuals, which I can't disagree with. Graphical representations of text are used throughout because virtually all the text is in fonts that browsers don't support and has visual effects that cannot be achieved using CSS (sIFR is not an option for this quantity of text). The colour contrast is subtle (i.e. low). There is continuous movement, audio that plays immediately on page loading and all kinds of whizzy stuff. The overall effect is fantastic for most users but it simply isn't possible to achieve the level of accessibility the client wants without making compromises. I so wish it was otherwise because this is a battle I don't want to have. Steve -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Joseph Taylor Sent: 14 August 2007 15:33 To: wsg@webstandardsgroup.org Subject: Re: [WSG] Usability Accessibility Over Design? There's no reason to have to sacrifice on either end of the scale. Every document should start as a plain, accessible HTML document. If the information on the document is well organized and logical, its already usable. At this point, progressive enhancements on all ends can be used to integrate higher level interaction. Your first level of enhancements come in the way of the visual design, color choices, basic styles. The second level is where CSS is taken a step further and used to perform image replacement, hide things, etc. The third level is where javascript manipulates objects in the document, or adds things in that are not part of the original HTML document, like flash movies, etc... You can keep adding in this directionmaking a page as rich and interactive as you want. Usability...thats not guaranteed anymore than a good visual design, but it is certainly a result of all things coming together with the same goal in mind. Joseph R. B. Taylor Sites by Joe, LLC http://sitesbyjoe.com [EMAIL PROTECTED] John Faulds wrote: Web Standards, Accessibility and Usability needs to be put right at the top of the list, way before design. I won't argue with that but all of those things are generally a harder sell to a client than the more superficial aspects of a project like the graphic design. *** 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] *** *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
RE: [WSG] Usability Accessibility Over Design?
It is scary that people still make the distinction between design and usability/accessibility/fitness for purpose. Design incorporates these things, and if it doesn't then it is indulgence, not design. Cheers, Andrew (working information architect) Andrew Boyd Consultant SMS Management Technology M 0413 048 542 T +61 2 6279 7100 F +61 2 6279 7101 [EMAIL PROTECTED]mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] About SMS: Ground Floor, 8 Brindabella Circuit, CANBERRA AIRPORT ACT 2609 www.smsmt.comhttps://magellan.smsmt.com/exchweb/bin/redir.asp?URL=http://www.smsmt.com/ SMS Management Technology (SMS) [ASX:SMX] is Australia's largest, publicly listed Management Services company. We solve complex problems and transform business through Consulting, People and Technology From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of minim Sent: Wednesday, 15 August 2007 7:38 AM To: wsg@webstandardsgroup.org Subject: Re: [WSG] Usability Accessibility Over Design? Hi James, On 14 Aug 2007, at 13:43, James Jeffery wrote: Web Standards, Accessibility and Usability needs to be put right at the top of the list, way before design. Focus on the users and the people, and it will help to create and bring the internet up to a better standard. I agree wholeheartedly with this. The point of design (as opposed to art) is that it is a functional artform. If it doesn't do the job it's enlisted to do (generally, to encourage people to use the site to whatever end by making it possible and enjoyable for them to do so), then it's a poor design and should therefore be changed. I'm not saying there isn't a place for good-looking websites - on the contrary - just that a good design is one which both achieves its purpose (usability/accessibility = increased visitors/sales/happiness/whatever) AND looks good while doing it. It's possible, but many designers need to be a little more informed and a little more flexible. It doesn't matter how good pale grey text on a white background looks if no-one can read what it says. Stick it on the wall of an art gallery though and I'll cheer :-) Just some thoughts... C. Caitlin Rowley, B. Mus. (Hons), Gr. Dip. Design Composer, musicologist, web designer http://www.minim-media.com/listen/ *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] *** This email and any files transmitted with it are confidential and intended solely for the use of the individual or entity to whom they are addressed. If you received this message in error or are not the intended recipient, you should destroy the e-mail message and any attachments or copies, and you are prohibited from retaining, distributing, disclosing or using any information contained herein. Please note that any views or opinions presented in this email are solely those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of the Company. The recipient should check this email and any attachments for the presence of viruses. The Company accepts no liability for any damage caused by any virus transmitted by this email. Thank you for your cooperation. *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
RE: [WSG] Usability Accessibility Over Design?
James Jeffery wrote: It is possible to get good Accessibility, Usability and Design, but usually you have to give and take for each or one of them. [] Its not our fault or the clients fault, whatever the client wants he gets [...] The client is the hard part. Sometimes they want something that you know is not going to be great on the Accessibility front, and you try to advise them, but they do not listen, so you then have to do the best possible Joseph Taylor wrote: As a web designer/developer, its my job to create the accessible version whether they consciously desire it or not simply because I know it should be built that way and it is my desire to build it properly. There are many different approaches to client-designer relationships, just as there are many different web design philosophies. I personally like Joseph's approach, but such an approach means that as a designer you are not approaching the client-designer relationship in a way that means the customer is always right. You are rather approaching it from a perspective that the customer does not know what is right, and needs you to educate and inform her/him. This can be good for your sense of moral certitude, but bad for your pocketbook. There will be some clients who are outraged by such an approach (especially if they are competing in a market where their competitors are going all flash-and-pizzazz AJAX-ey on you and doing it on the cheap by hiring the lowest bidder). There are others who will thank you for it (especially the government/NGO sector or any other sector where a a governing body will eventually bring in a set of accessibility/standard guidelines that become required for all parts of the sector). I don't think you can find a way of satisfying both groups and at the same time satisfying yourself. Choose your target market and live with it. If you have enough time to browse the WSG Mailing List and write articles about the relationship between accessibility, usability, and good design, then you are probably already at risk of having the prices for your web design services severely undercut by someone who is younger and faster, and who places less importance on accessibility or standards...I mean, seriously, whatever! As long as it works, right!?! In which case, your target market has already been narrowed for you. Phil. *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
RE: [WSG] Usability Accessibility Over Design?
Philip Kiff mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: If you have enough time to browse the WSG Mailing List [] then you are probably already at risk of having the prices for your web design services severely undercut by someone who is younger and faster, and who places less importance on accessibility or standards...I mean, seriously, whatever! As long as it works, right!?! A quick clarification, to deflect any criticism about my implied ageism. That was just an example. There are of course lots of young whippersnappers who can code like demons and do so in fully accessible and standards-compliant fashion. Indeed, I expect that there are many more *old* web designers who do things wrong than young ones. But the younger ones are often willing work for less (at least initially), and so they are the real competition in the context of my earlier message... Phil. *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
RE: [WSG] Usability Accessibility Over Design?
Our customer is one of the largest corporations in the world. They have several hundred brands, each of which is valued at upwards of $100M. Most of these brands are many decades old and have historically been advertised in traditional media such as print, TV, billboards etc. Style is everything, particularly for the cosmetics brands. The problem we have is that the brands have a very well established brand image that the brand managers and the design agencies are not willing to compromise at all. They don't care about SEO, accessibility or anything else really. They spend millions on market research to find out what their customers like, and they cater for the majority. They are (currently) unwilling to risk diluting this in any way to cater for minorities, and they are far from convinced about the commercial benefits if they did. If you're building a site from scratch for a brand that is not well known then I agree it is relatively easy to achieve a design that is both attractive and accessible. In a case like ours where the customer already has something they like, it's a lot harder or may be impossible. Many of these brands have billion dollar sales, so they are rightly wary of making any change that isn't supported by market research. After all, what's the downside for us if we're wrong? Incidentally, the Zeldman site is not a good example in my opinion. In fact all image replacement techniques are a non-starter because the image cannot be resized and the colours cannot be changed. sIFR is still too flaky (at least all the examples I have seen are). Steve _ From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Tim Palac Sent: 14 August 2007 23:02 To: wsg@webstandardsgroup.org Subject: Re: [WSG] Usability Accessibility Over Design? You've got an interesting point, Steve. Transitioning from non-accessible websites to accessible websites seems like it would require some sacrifice in look and feel. In fact, I was prone to thinking the same thing, but check out http://www.zeldman.com. You see that he's using images in the navigation, but when you disabled the styles these turn into text links. I haven't ever used this technique, but doesn't that achieve what you're talking about? Even if this whole text link with CSS images is too complex, it seems like the web is going away from graphical representations of text in general. What you lose in graphics, you gain back in SEO and accessibility - that's an easy way to pitch it to a client. Besides, CSS can do some stunning things with text. A good example is http://www.particletree.com - the only images on that page are with a specific purpose, and not to replace text. Also, I'd question you in saying that continuous movement, audio that loads automatically, and whizzy stuff is enhancing to the user experience. Honestly, I'm more prone to turn off a site with these features, especially the audio that plays automatically - when you reload the site, it reloads the audio, and that's just annoying :) Have you gotten feedback that this is positive, or is it just what the client wants? -Tim www.timpalac.com *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
