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
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
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
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
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
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,
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
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:
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
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
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
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
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
-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
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
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
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
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
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
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
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
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
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
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
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
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
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
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
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
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
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
31 matches
Mail list logo
