[Web4lib] Web technologies and public access

[Jennifer Heise]

I think it's really hard to do some kind of things without using interactive
media, it's true. And making things look good is useful. But anytime I
encounter a site where the content is inaccessible because it's all in
flash-- and there's one on our library's page-- I ask myself whether the
content is a) important and/or b) meaningful. I've encountered so many
situations where Flash plug-ins get messed up and require time and effort to
get fixed, even on working computers.

The question we have to ask ourselves is: Is it important to us that our
users get this information even if their computers are messed up? Or is this
an optional, fun add on? If we're ok with not giving that content to users
because of browser issues, so be it.

Bear in mind, too, that any material done in Flash may not be easy to fix
later on, as we found out when a Flash-based exhibit turned out to have an
embarrassing typo in it.

-- Jenne H.

On Feb 4, 2008 2:37 PM, K.G. Schneider <kgs at bluehighways.com> wrote:

> Rich, if design were an issue, my blog wouldn't have any readers. But
> that aside, while I too focus on content and have loved many an ugly
> book, it's not a question of our tolerance level--it's about what users
> want, as well as the image we're projecting.
>
> Karen G. Schneider
>
>
> On Mon, 4 Feb 2008 14:22:01 -0500, "Richard Wiggins"
> <richard.wiggins at gmail.com> said:
> > On Feb 4, 2008 2:21 PM, Richard Wiggins <richard.wiggins at gmail.com>
> > wrote:
> >
> > > Sigh,
> > >
> > > I should've used Martin Luther King and CSS.
> > >
> > > Karen, I appreciate when a Web site uses a clever or appealing design.
>  I
> > > appreciate a good aesthetic.  I try very hard not to judge the words
> by the
> > > font.
> > >
> > > /rich
> > >
> > >   On Feb 4, 2008 2:00 PM, K.G. Schneider <kgs at bluehighways.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > > > I reject the notion that a particular Web site needs to keep up
> with
> > > > > fashion
> > > > > or hew to a particular style.  I don't care if a given Web site
> looks
> > > > > like
> > > > > it was designed on an Underwood typewriter if the words ring true.
> > > >  Sure,
> > > > > you appreciate savvy design, but wise words are wise words.  I
> doubt
> > > > > Gandhi
> > > > > would be doing PowerPoint if he were alive today.
> > > >
> > > > Um... did you really put PowerPoint and usability in the same
> paragraph?
> > > > ;)
> > > >
> > > > I most emphatically embrace the notion that a website "needs to keep
> up
> > > > with fashion." Aesthetics matter; so does emotional content. The
> design
> > > > is part of the message. We want people to enjoy our websites -- to
> > > > linger on them and to feel better about us because of them.  (And
> > > > because you're a good guy I know you won't translate that to "Karen
> > > > hates usability and thinks websites should be built with Flash.")
> > > >
> > > > Also, in terms of Nielsen's site, his site wasn't just ugly (imho,
> still
> > > > is), but for a very long time, it was hard to read. You shouldn't
> have
> > > > to move your head to read the text on a webpage, or squint your way
> > > > through long undifferentiated paragraphs in a san serif font.  If
> you
> > > > want to be an authority on something, then walk the walk. I know,
> it's
> > > > scandalous cuz he's been the Man when it comes to usability, but I
> am
> > > > not alone in this opinion (and in fact I came to that opinion All By
> > > > Myself and was quite relieved to find out just how not-alone I
> was...
> > > > and how LONG I've not been alone!).
> > > >
> > > > To the extent that there's an unfortunate gulf between graphic
> designers
> > > > and usability experts, Nielsen has not helped close that gap.
> > > >
> > > > This does not mean that Nielsen hasn't contributed a lot to the web
> > > > world or that he won't continue to do so. But you either believe
> > > > aesthetics are part of functionality, or you don't. I do.
> > > >
> > > > K.G. Schneider
> > > > kgs at freerangelibrarian.com
> > > > _______________________________________________
> > > >  Web4lib mailing list
> > > > Web4lib at webjunction.org
> > > > http://lists.webjunction.org/web4lib/
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Web4lib mailing list
> > Web4lib at webjunction.org
> > http://lists.webjunction.org/web4lib/
> _______________________________________________
> Web4lib mailing list
> Web4lib at webjunction.org
> http://lists.webjunction.org/web4lib/
>