So, Jay Cornelius [of coffeecup.com] stopped by to talk about new fronts HTML5 & CSS are conquering. Why are web standards important? He did bring some points home for me. One thing he mentioned was that web standards are important because they aid in machine readability, SEO, portability [mobile accessibility] and for users who are impeded [e.g. blind and/or deaf people], web standards ensure that content is accessible to everyone. An example would be the use of "alt" or "title" tags for an images, which would ensure that screen readers would be able to pick up. As Jay put it, "web standards help us convey meaning to machines other than humans".
So Jay also explained the Acid Test, which basically tells how closely compliant a web browser is. He did point out that the browser that adheres to web standards is Opera - who? Though not as popular as IE/Firefox/Safari/Chrome, it is gaining popularity. The reason for Opera's success can be attributed to [among others] one Håkon Wium Lie who is their Chief Technical Officer. Håkon Wium Lie is the 'godfather' of CSS. He is the guy who wrote the CSS spec so er' go. Jay did talk about WebKit [a layout engine that allows browsers to render web content] and how close and quickly they are catching up but for now, Opera is clearly ahead of the web-standards-compliance race.
Jay cautioned against the using acid tests as a measure of browser rendering because, in his words, "the acid test does not tell how a browser tests in the real world". Ever heard of the box model? For one, thanks to Mr Cornelius, I now know that it was a key difference in the difference between Internet Explorer & Netscape. I also learned that IE introduced CSS - kinda. Shock right!? Only thing is they did it poorly which lead to great demand for change because of developer and user dissatisfaction. So....[ahem] all browsers, developers, and users should thank IE for sucking so bad that the revolt resulted in greater innovation and web tools.
When designing a website, the issue of cross browser similarity in as far as appearance and functionality is an oxymoron. It is extremely difficult to say the least - with the ever changing versions and capabilities of new releases of software/computers - it is practically impossible. As a developer, he advised that one does not have to deliver content that looks exactly alike across browsers. What is paramount is to "deliver results fast, have a rich user experience for whatever browser the user is utilizing". Lets face it - we are faithful to our browsers - I do not see Mac Users switching between IE and the same goes for the rest of the browsers. Once we get used to a browser, it becomes our BOC [Browser of Choice] so - cater to the user and less focus on cross browser similarity. Those days are over!
Another tidbit I did not know - Internet Explorer [version 6+] - yes even IE - supports Doctype. He advised against running IE is quirks mode and said using the right character type is crucial. His suggestion- he suggested charsetUTF - 8.
All in all, it was a good visit. I learned some new things and look forward to the promise HTML5 will bring.
Nod to Sophia Petrillo
Competition. A word I love when companies duke it out in an effort to garner customer loyalty [among other things]. Google recently added Google Instant. Real time search results as you type. Results update as you type. Woo hoo for Google right?! Well, according to Luke W., Yahoo! actually had this technology as far back as 2005. Makes me glad to know that the customer [me] is at the forefront of innovation. Unfortunately for Yahoo!, Google worked out all the kinks and rolled it out before they did. So this round goes to Google. However, what if, as you type, the results brought back were irrelevant to what you wanted – much like finishing somebody's sentence thinking you know exactly what they are going to say only to find out you were wrong? This feature would be totally irrelevant if not annoying. As Luke W. said, "there is a fine line between relevance and distraction..." Any results that are apart from your match criteria only detract from and could possibly lose you customers. Another consideration is server load implications, which is the reason Yahoo! did not include it on their search. Real time searches mean that two or three searches are being carried out concurrently and can increase server load ten fold. This drastically increases server load and considerations have to be taken into account.
Mr. Wroblewski listed 3 innovations in Web Usability that would enhance user experience:
- Rich Interactions:
- Input can come from anywhere.
Users are spending more time off your site than on. E.g. Email clients, chat windows, bookmarks, browser extensions, calendars, e.t.c. As opposed to previous experience that required user visits and filling in forms as a way to capture information. Case in point - this blog is typed in Microsoft Word and published by a click of a button.
- Providing information to Social Networking Systems.
Since these networks already have the platforms that allow users to input information, many types of forms such as sign up , profile creation and any form that requires inputting information can be done away with. User experience connections would only require hitting a button/link and make connections [case in point: uploading images to a website. A practice that users do not like doing].
His metaphor at the end is not only funny but serves as a cautionary tale as well: " If a 160 million are driving down a road and I put a pile of dog poop on that road, chances are 1 million people will drive through it. Numbers alone are not an indicator that you have a good product."
