Web Design and Architecture
At the Web Standards Project weblog a few weeks ago, Ian Lloyd pointed out a post on Web Pages that Suck entitled The Biggest Web Design Mistakes of 2004. In his article, Vincent Flanders claims that one of the biggest web design mistakes of 2004 is "Mystical belief in the power of Web Standards, Usability, and tableless CSS,"
There is nothing wrong with any of the above except they're being touted by...guess who?...people who offer web design services specializing in...guess what?...Web Standards, Usability, and tableless CSS. These are simply tools. Remember, nobody gets excited about the tools used to build a house ("Please tell me what brand of hammers you used!"). People get excited about how the house looks and performs.
He goes on to discuss that businesses aren't interested in standards, usability, or the code behind a site; they are only interested in increasing traffic and revenue and turning over more customers. This is all very true (and something that, yes, standards zealots can sometimes ignore). However, the growing endorsement of web standards is based on more than just a mystical belief; it is the logical conclusion of intelligent designers and developments who see real results from their implementation of web standards and who hope to positively influence the future of a still fledgling industry.
Blueprints, Plans, and Walkthroughs
Don't look now, Mr. Flanders, but there's a problem with your analogy. You compare web standards and usability to "tools used to build a house." That's just silly. In keeping with your architectural analogy, web standards would be more akin to the building specifications, building materials (should we use wood? cement? brick?), and perhaps even local zoning and building regulatory laws. Those comparisons may seem a bit disparate, and they are. But web standards encompass several different concepts - not only the code behind the actual site, but also the specifications and code ideologies that code is based on.
Also in his analogy, usability studies would more accurately relate to architectural walkthroughs, industry best practices, and the regular discourse between an architect and a tenant that must happen for both sides to be mutually satisfied. It's funny how these are sounding less like tools, and more like the things that are worthwhile considerations from the client's side.
What Are the Tools Then?
So what are those tools that Mr. Flanders mentions (like the hammer)? The tools are the basic software and reference guides that go into producing a website. Like construction tools, these tools aren't necessary to hold the house together once it's built. But when you need to update your website, you can pull them out again.
About this Entry
This entry was posted on
Monday, March 7, 2005 at 10:02 AM under the categories:
Web Design.
Comments
1. On Monday, Mar 7 at 12:28 PM, Keith said:
This whole thing was funny to me because I've used the house metaphor to help explain standards. I mean, you'd not want your architect or construction folks using non-standards materials and measurements in building your house right?
Speaking of tools. Mr Flanders strikes me as one.
2. On Monday, Mar 7 at 1:39 PM, Ste said:
Haha, I didn't want to be so forthright in my rebuttal, but yes. He does.
I really don't understand the folks who rebel against standards for the reason that some people are zealous about them. I struggled for so long with whether to follow through with a career in web development because of the awful nature of most code only a few years ago. I got sick of using spacer gifs and tables and all that baggage only to end up with a site that worked in only half the browsers. And now that standards are gaining acceptance with all the major browsers, people complain that we hype them too much?
Further comments are not allowed for this entry.