LISTSERV mailing list manager LISTSERV 16.5

Help for CODE4LIB Archives


CODE4LIB Archives

CODE4LIB Archives


CODE4LIB@LISTS.CLIR.ORG


View:

Message:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

By Topic:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

By Author:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

Font:

Proportional Font

LISTSERV Archives

LISTSERV Archives

CODE4LIB Home

CODE4LIB Home

CODE4LIB  October 2018

CODE4LIB October 2018

Subject:

Re: Default, preferred, or supported "enterprise" browser?

From:

Kate Deibel <[log in to unmask]>

Reply-To:

Code for Libraries <[log in to unmask]>

Date:

Wed, 17 Oct 2018 15:59:34 +0000

Content-Type:

text/plain

Parts/Attachments:

Parts/Attachments

text/plain (1 lines)

I get the ideas being proffered here, but a lot of what's being said when talking about "elegance" or "clean" or "pure" websites are from ideal scenarios that frankly don't happen much or at all. Just within library web technology, we often don't get to completely own a site. We're using vendor software that allows customizations---that ability to customize beyond just colors and such requires some complexity. Even if we are working at the source level, we're often placed in content management systems that structure how we do thing on a more global structure. CMS systems allow more people to generate pages, which I view as good. I don't view it as realistic to expect everyone to write pages at the source level. Browser nuances alone are bad enough, but I don't even trust the "experts." I have run out of fingers to count the times I've had this conversation about web accessibility:

"Accessibility guidelines are ridiculous. They make you use headings. They look ugly and are huge and have weird spacing!"

The solution is simply to apply CSS styling, but I hear this from web administrators. I've had this conversation THREE times in Code4Lib spaces, even in public on the Slack channel.

But then there's the comments about too much text on websites and not using JavaScript to have dynamic showing/hiding. First, some pages will have a lot of text. Search result pages will have lots of text by their very nature. Wikipedia pages are full of text. Instructions will have lots of text and pictures. 

So your suggestion is to move content across multiple pages. It's both a good and horrible idea. Early hypermedia studies showed that providing any sort of distinct structural separation aided the reader's memory and recall. The same studies also provide evidence that pagination is more cognitively supportive than infinite scrolling. However, if you're talking about a website where a person has to do work and carry information across multiple pages, you've actually introduced more of a cognitive load on the user to carry information over from page to page. This is further complicated in that page loads take time. So it's sometimes good to have a long page with multiple dynamic elements. But oops... that hurts cognitive accessibility due to information overload. Neither extreme works.

Overall, good web design requires you to find that balance between overwhelming the user with information while not overstressing the memory of said user. And recognizing that people's individual definitions of "too much" and "too little" differ. What might be pure to you in a website is lacking or overwhelming to someone else.

Of course, we should push back on flair for flair's sake. Say no to shiny monkey tech. Just don't go too far in that extreme. Do you really want online maps to require a page load for every zoom or pan again? Do you want forms to only do error detection on the server side only? 

Katherine Deibel | PhD
Inclusion & Accessibility Librarian
Syracuse University Libraries 
T 315.443.7178
[log in to unmask]
222 Waverly Ave., Syracuse, NY 13244
Syracuse University

-----Original Message-----
From: Code for Libraries <[log in to unmask]> On Behalf Of Amy Drayer
Sent: Wednesday, October 17, 2018 10:51 AM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: [CODE4LIB] Default, preferred, or supported "enterprise" browser?

Dear Eric and Code4Libbers:

I completely agree! Too much javascript, and used with critical information that HTML can easily do for a fraction of the (resource) cost. When I get a chance to really "own" the website I work on (right now it's been a series of UI bandaids on siloed content), I'm going to look at the 10k website challenge (https://a-k-apart.com) for inspiration. (I'd be happy if we could stay under 100k...)

Honestly, I find this challenge intriguing because if done right it addresses several inclusive design concerns including performance and accessibility. While I don't agree with every reason in this ID24 presentation, I found Elegant Accessibility (
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mlMfynLKGXA&index=15&list=PLn7dsvRdQEfEnBxpVztmJ8KCKNJ_P-hR6)
to be inspirational.

In peace,

Amy M. Drayer, MLIS
User Interface Developer
[log in to unmask]
http://www.puzumaki.com


On Wed, Oct 17, 2018 at 5:58 AM Eric Lease Morgan <[log in to unmask]> wrote:

> Personally, I think Web/HTML pages are much too complicated these 
> days. I suppose it goes with the evolution of the medium, but at the 
> same time, I think the same information can be communicated much more 
> easily and effectively if it were made available sans too much Javascript, etc.
> Javascript is not necessary. --Eric Morgan
>

Top of Message | Previous Page | Permalink

Advanced Options


Options

Log In

Log In

Get Password

Get Password


Search Archives

Search Archives


Subscribe or Unsubscribe

Subscribe or Unsubscribe


Archives

April 2019
March 2019
February 2019
January 2019
December 2018
November 2018
October 2018
September 2018
August 2018
July 2018
June 2018
May 2018
April 2018
March 2018
February 2018
January 2018
December 2017
November 2017
October 2017
September 2017
August 2017
July 2017
June 2017
May 2017
April 2017
March 2017
February 2017
January 2017
December 2016
November 2016
October 2016
September 2016
August 2016
July 2016
June 2016
May 2016
April 2016
March 2016
February 2016
January 2016
December 2015
November 2015
October 2015
September 2015
August 2015
July 2015
June 2015
May 2015
April 2015
March 2015
February 2015
January 2015
December 2014
November 2014
October 2014
September 2014
August 2014
July 2014
June 2014
May 2014
April 2014
March 2014
February 2014
January 2014
December 2013
November 2013
October 2013
September 2013
August 2013
July 2013
June 2013
May 2013
April 2013
March 2013
February 2013
January 2013
December 2012
November 2012
October 2012
September 2012
August 2012
July 2012
June 2012
May 2012
April 2012
March 2012
February 2012
January 2012
December 2011
November 2011
October 2011
September 2011
August 2011
July 2011
June 2011
May 2011
April 2011
March 2011
February 2011
January 2011
December 2010
November 2010
October 2010
September 2010
August 2010
July 2010
June 2010
May 2010
April 2010
March 2010
February 2010
January 2010
December 2009
November 2009
October 2009
September 2009
August 2009
July 2009
June 2009
May 2009
April 2009
March 2009
February 2009
January 2009
December 2008
November 2008
October 2008
September 2008
August 2008
July 2008
June 2008
May 2008
April 2008
March 2008
February 2008
January 2008
December 2007
November 2007
October 2007
September 2007
August 2007
July 2007
June 2007
May 2007
April 2007
March 2007
February 2007
January 2007
December 2006
November 2006
October 2006
September 2006
August 2006
July 2006
June 2006
May 2006
April 2006
March 2006
February 2006
January 2006
December 2005
November 2005
October 2005
September 2005
August 2005
July 2005
June 2005
May 2005
April 2005
March 2005
February 2005
January 2005
December 2004
November 2004
October 2004
September 2004
August 2004
July 2004
June 2004
May 2004
April 2004
March 2004
February 2004
January 2004
December 2003
November 2003

ATOM RSS1 RSS2



LISTS.CLIR.ORG

CataList Email List Search Powered by the LISTSERV Email List Manager