Re: [backstage] A decent editorially-ordered BBC News feed?
Just in case it's of interest, bitty browser (http://www.bitty.com) is handy for embedding cut-down web sites in personal homepages like iGoogle. E.g. you could make it open the mobile version of the BBC news ( http://news.bbc.co.uk/nolpda/ukfs_news/hi/default.stm), and have a nice BBC news gadget you can embed in most homepages, without the need to create a gadget yourself. Mario.
RE: [backstage] Web 2.0 'neglecting good Accessible design'
This was an interesting article on UI design. http://tantek.com/log/2007/02.html#d19t1813 It's from February so you may have already seen it. I found it referenced on the codinghorror blog which also has an article in praise of javascript (http://www.codinghorror.com/blog/archives/000857.html) -Original Message- From: Brian Butterworth [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: 16 May 2007 17:05 To: backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk Subject: RE: [backstage] Web 2.0 'neglecting good Accessible design' You may also like to try this site, it has access to Google, Microsoft, Ask and NASA mapping and satellite photos... http://www.flashearth.com/?lat=51.509979lon=-0.226138z=17.8; r=0src=msl It is easily iframed Brian Butterworth www.ukfree.tv -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Jason Cartwright Sent: 16 May 2007 09:34 To: backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk Subject: RE: [backstage] Web 2.0 'neglecting good Accessible design' Yes, javascript is required for the full, slick experience, obviously. All parts of the site are still usable when JS is off (that I can see), and seemingly entirely accessible via the keyboard. With JS on, the keys work in most browsers, although some require you to have the map in focus. Of course Google Maps has a well documented API that could be used to create uber-accessible versions for different needs - http://www.google.com/apis/maps/ J -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of ~:'' Sent: 15 May 2007 21:32 To: backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk Subject: Re: [backstage] Web 2.0 'neglecting good Accessible design' Jason Stephen, when javascript is disabled in Opera or Camino the message is: Your web browser is not fully supported by Google Maps I wonder is the code IE7 specific? none of the keys work for me on os x unless I'm missing something this hardly qualifies as accessible... regards Jonathan Chetwynd On 15 May 2007, at 16:57, Jason Cartwright wrote: Disable javascript. Everything works fine. J -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:owner- [EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of ~:'' Sent: 15 May 2007 16:47 To: backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk Subject: Re: [backstage] Web 2.0 'neglecting good Accessible design' Richard, how does one use http://maps.google.com/ via the keyboard? cheers Jonathan Chetwynd On 15 May 2007, at 13:22, Richard Lockwood wrote: This particular rant seems to be about useability rather than accessibility (although I appreciate the two are often closely related). Much as I often loathe Nielsen's writing - Jason's right, it's often all about Nielsen more than it is about any actual problems - in this case he's got a point. Web 2.0 sites are often completely unuseable - MySpace being a prime example, and Flickr (although it's been a while since I tried to use it to post a few pics and it may well have improved) another. Google Maps however, I'd hold up as a prime example of excellent intuitive design and useability. Just as the phrase Web 2.0 means different things to all people (I avoid it if at all possible as I feel it just makes the user sound like a buzzword spouting bandwagon-jumper who hasn't a clue what he's actually saying ;-) ), you can't tar all Web 2.0 sites with the same brush. Anyway, I've banged on far too long now, and this is what Nielsen wants - people to discuss HIM HIM HIM!!! Frankly, the less I hear of and from this tedious old bore, the happier I am. Cheers, Rich. On 5/15/07, ~:'' [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Jason Gordon any good Accessible Web 2.0 websites you'd care to plug? or are you in a rush? cheers Jonathan Chetwynd On 15 May 2007, at 10:18, Jason Cartwright wrote: This is all my personal opinion, and I entirely disagree. Mr Nielsen has a history of spouting contrary opinions to court controversy and gain publicity for himself and his company. Web 2.0[1] (for me at least) incorporates best practice methodologies of developing to standards (and the consequences of this, such as progressive enhancement etc) and trusting users as co- developers [2]. These core principals of Web 2.0 encourage good design. As with any technology, Web 2.0 will be misused - it's not the technology's fault that this happens, it's the designer/developer that fouled it up's problem. That doesn't look as good when you're goading mainstream journos into writing about you though, does it? J [1] I've stuck all these in quotes, as I think Web 2.0 means different things to different people. [2] Tim O'Reilly -Original Message- From: [EMAIL
RE: [backstage] Web 2.0 'neglecting good Accessible design'
'Minimize the number of text fields in your interfaces down to the absolute minimum necessary. Minimize the number of click/keystrokes/gestures necessary to accomplish actions in your interface. Make your interface as responsive as possible - minimize the latency of each and every action a user might take in your interface.' Something that Jakob Nielsen's been on about for about fifteen years, methinks. www.useit.com Brian Butterworth www.ukfree.tv -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Simon Cobb Sent: 22 May 2007 11:47 To: Simon Cobb; backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk Subject: RE: [backstage] Web 2.0 'neglecting good Accessible design' This was an interesting article on UI design. http://tantek.com/log/2007/02.html#d19t1813 It's from February so you may have already seen it. I found it referenced on the codinghorror blog which also has an article in praise of javascript (http://www.codinghorror.com/blog/archives/000857.html) -Original Message- From: Brian Butterworth [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: 16 May 2007 17:05 To: backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk Subject: RE: [backstage] Web 2.0 'neglecting good Accessible design' You may also like to try this site, it has access to Google, Microsoft, Ask and NASA mapping and satellite photos... http://www.flashearth.com/?lat=51.509979lon=-0.226138z=17.8; r=0src=msl It is easily iframed Brian Butterworth www.ukfree.tv -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Jason Cartwright Sent: 16 May 2007 09:34 To: backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk Subject: RE: [backstage] Web 2.0 'neglecting good Accessible design' Yes, javascript is required for the full, slick experience, obviously. All parts of the site are still usable when JS is off (that I can see), and seemingly entirely accessible via the keyboard. With JS on, the keys work in most browsers, although some require you to have the map in focus. Of course Google Maps has a well documented API that could be used to create uber-accessible versions for different needs - http://www.google.com/apis/maps/ J -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of ~:'' Sent: 15 May 2007 21:32 To: backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk Subject: Re: [backstage] Web 2.0 'neglecting good Accessible design' Jason Stephen, when javascript is disabled in Opera or Camino the message is: Your web browser is not fully supported by Google Maps I wonder is the code IE7 specific? none of the keys work for me on os x unless I'm missing something this hardly qualifies as accessible... regards Jonathan Chetwynd On 15 May 2007, at 16:57, Jason Cartwright wrote: Disable javascript. Everything works fine. J -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:owner- [EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of ~:'' Sent: 15 May 2007 16:47 To: backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk Subject: Re: [backstage] Web 2.0 'neglecting good Accessible design' Richard, how does one use http://maps.google.com/ via the keyboard? cheers Jonathan Chetwynd On 15 May 2007, at 13:22, Richard Lockwood wrote: This particular rant seems to be about useability rather than accessibility (although I appreciate the two are often closely related). Much as I often loathe Nielsen's writing - Jason's right, it's often all about Nielsen more than it is about any actual problems - in this case he's got a point. Web 2.0 sites are often completely unuseable - MySpace being a prime example, and Flickr (although it's been a while since I tried to use it to post a few pics and it may well have improved) another. Google Maps however, I'd hold up as a prime example of excellent intuitive design and useability. Just as the phrase Web 2.0 means different things to all people (I avoid it if at all possible as I feel it just makes the user sound like a buzzword spouting bandwagon-jumper who hasn't a clue what he's actually saying ;-) ), you can't tar all Web 2.0 sites with the same brush. Anyway, I've banged on far too long now, and this is what Nielsen wants - people to discuss HIM HIM HIM!!! Frankly, the less I hear of and from this tedious old bore, the happier I am. Cheers, Rich. On 5/15/07, ~:'' [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Jason Gordon any good Accessible Web 2.0 websites you'd care to plug? or are you in a rush? cheers Jonathan Chetwynd On 15 May 2007, at 10:18, Jason Cartwright wrote: This is all my personal opinion, and I entirely disagree. Mr
Re: [backstage] A decent editorially-ordered BBC News feed?
Richard P Edwards wrote: You are not alone I tried a couple of years ago to use the BBC RSS, and just found it had little order. That does not just apply to the BBC, I don't use RSS for anything apart from Wired. It's in a good editorial order with the Mac OSX RSS Screen Saver, which is all I use RSS for... -- From the North, this is Kirk - Sent via the backstage.bbc.co.uk discussion group. To unsubscribe, please visit http://backstage.bbc.co.uk/archives/2005/01/mailing_list.html. Unofficial list archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk/
Re: [backstage] Web 2.0 'neglecting good Accessible design'
Something that every web developer capable of writing their own name without using Dreamweaver or Frontpage has been banging on about for the last 15 years. I don't see why Nielsen gets the credit for that one. :-) Cheers, Rich. On 5/22/07, Brian Butterworth [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: 'Minimize the number of text fields in your interfaces down to the absolute minimum necessary. Minimize the number of click/keystrokes/gestures necessary to accomplish actions in your interface. Make your interface as responsive as possible - minimize the latency of each and every action a user might take in your interface.' Something that Jakob Nielsen's been on about for about fifteen years, methinks. www.useit.com Brian Butterworth www.ukfree.tv -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Simon Cobb Sent: 22 May 2007 11:47 To: Simon Cobb; backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk Subject: RE: [backstage] Web 2.0 'neglecting good Accessible design' This was an interesting article on UI design. http://tantek.com/log/2007/02.html#d19t1813 It's from February so you may have already seen it. I found it referenced on the codinghorror blog which also has an article in praise of javascript (http://www.codinghorror.com/blog/archives/000857.html) -Original Message- From: Brian Butterworth [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: 16 May 2007 17:05 To: backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk Subject: RE: [backstage] Web 2.0 'neglecting good Accessible design' You may also like to try this site, it has access to Google, Microsoft, Ask and NASA mapping and satellite photos... http://www.flashearth.com/?lat=51.509979lon=-0.226138z=17.8; r=0src=msl It is easily iframed Brian Butterworth www.ukfree.tv -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Jason Cartwright Sent: 16 May 2007 09:34 To: backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk Subject: RE: [backstage] Web 2.0 'neglecting good Accessible design' Yes, javascript is required for the full, slick experience, obviously. All parts of the site are still usable when JS is off (that I can see), and seemingly entirely accessible via the keyboard. With JS on, the keys work in most browsers, although some require you to have the map in focus. Of course Google Maps has a well documented API that could be used to create uber-accessible versions for different needs - http://www.google.com/apis/maps/ J -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of ~:'' Sent: 15 May 2007 21:32 To: backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk Subject: Re: [backstage] Web 2.0 'neglecting good Accessible design' Jason Stephen, when javascript is disabled in Opera or Camino the message is: Your web browser is not fully supported by Google Maps I wonder is the code IE7 specific? none of the keys work for me on os x unless I'm missing something this hardly qualifies as accessible... regards Jonathan Chetwynd On 15 May 2007, at 16:57, Jason Cartwright wrote: Disable javascript. Everything works fine. J -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:owner- [EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of ~:'' Sent: 15 May 2007 16:47 To: backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk Subject: Re: [backstage] Web 2.0 'neglecting good Accessible design' Richard, how does one use http://maps.google.com/ via the keyboard? cheers Jonathan Chetwynd On 15 May 2007, at 13:22, Richard Lockwood wrote: This particular rant seems to be about useability rather than accessibility (although I appreciate the two are often closely related). Much as I often loathe Nielsen's writing - Jason's right, it's often all about Nielsen more than it is about any actual problems - in this case he's got a point. Web 2.0 sites are often completely unuseable - MySpace being a prime example, and Flickr (although it's been a while since I tried to use it to post a few pics and it may well have improved) another. Google Maps however, I'd hold up as a prime example of excellent intuitive design and useability. Just as the phrase Web 2.0 means different things to all people (I avoid it if at all possible as I feel it just makes the user sound like a buzzword spouting bandwagon-jumper who hasn't a clue what he's actually saying ;-) ), you can't tar all Web 2.0 sites with the same brush. Anyway, I've banged on far too long now, and this is what Nielsen wants - people to discuss HIM HIM HIM!!! Frankly, the less I hear of and from this tedious old bore, the happier I am. Cheers, Rich. On 5/15/07, ~:'' [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Jason Gordon any good Accessible Web 2.0 websites you'd care to
RE: [backstage] Web 2.0 'neglecting good Accessible design'
I get the feeling Nielson is deliberately provocative for the sake of it sometimes (although if it sparks discussion in an area, then hell why not). I still think he needs to update his own web site though, it looks like it's stuck in the 90s. I think I've said that before, too :/ -Original Message- From: Richard Lockwood [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: 22 May 2007 14:12 To: backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk Subject: Re: [backstage] Web 2.0 'neglecting good Accessible design' Something that every web developer capable of writing their own name without using Dreamweaver or Frontpage has been banging on about for the last 15 years. I don't see why Nielsen gets the credit for that one. :-) Cheers, Rich. On 5/22/07, Brian Butterworth [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: 'Minimize the number of text fields in your interfaces down to the absolute minimum necessary. Minimize the number of click/keystrokes/gestures necessary to accomplish actions in your interface. Make your interface as responsive as possible - minimize the latency of each and every action a user might take in your interface.' Something that Jakob Nielsen's been on about for about fifteen years, methinks. www.useit.com Brian Butterworth www.ukfree.tv -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Simon Cobb Sent: 22 May 2007 11:47 To: Simon Cobb; backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk Subject: RE: [backstage] Web 2.0 'neglecting good Accessible design' This was an interesting article on UI design. http://tantek.com/log/2007/02.html#d19t1813 It's from February so you may have already seen it. I found it referenced on the codinghorror blog which also has an article in praise of javascript (http://www.codinghorror.com/blog/archives/000857.html) -Original Message- From: Brian Butterworth [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: 16 May 2007 17:05 To: backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk Subject: RE: [backstage] Web 2.0 'neglecting good Accessible design' You may also like to try this site, it has access to Google, Microsoft, Ask and NASA mapping and satellite photos... http://www.flashearth.com/?lat=51.509979lon=-0.226138z=17.8; r=0src=msl It is easily iframed Brian Butterworth www.ukfree.tv -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Jason Cartwright Sent: 16 May 2007 09:34 To: backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk Subject: RE: [backstage] Web 2.0 'neglecting good Accessible design' Yes, javascript is required for the full, slick experience, obviously. All parts of the site are still usable when JS is off (that I can see), and seemingly entirely accessible via the keyboard. With JS on, the keys work in most browsers, although some require you to have the map in focus. Of course Google Maps has a well documented API that could be used to create uber-accessible versions for different needs - http://www.google.com/apis/maps/ J -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of ~:'' Sent: 15 May 2007 21:32 To: backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk Subject: Re: [backstage] Web 2.0 'neglecting good Accessible design' Jason Stephen, when javascript is disabled in Opera or Camino the message is: Your web browser is not fully supported by Google Maps I wonder is the code IE7 specific? none of the keys work for me on os x unless I'm missing something this hardly qualifies as accessible... regards Jonathan Chetwynd On 15 May 2007, at 16:57, Jason Cartwright wrote: Disable javascript. Everything works fine. J -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:owner- [EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of ~:'' Sent: 15 May 2007 16:47 To: backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk Subject: Re: [backstage] Web 2.0 'neglecting good Accessible design' Richard, how does one use http://maps.google.com/ via the keyboard? cheers Jonathan Chetwynd On 15 May 2007, at 13:22, Richard Lockwood wrote: This particular rant seems to be about useability rather than accessibility (although I appreciate the two are often closely related). Much as I often loathe Nielsen's writing - Jason's right, it's often all about Nielsen more than it is about any actual problems - in this case he's got a point. Web 2.0 sites are often completely unuseable - MySpace being a prime example, and Flickr (although it's been a while since I tried to use it to post a few pics and it may well
[backstage] This one's for Cridland... BBC A/V interface ideas
Whilst on the subject of interface and UI design, I was thinking about the BBC site's design. So, the BBC has a burgeoning portfolio of online multimedia offerings, and they have their BBC Audio/Video link in the left bar of the BBC News site (and elsewhere on the site), but once you're actually on that page you're given a rather odd selection of videos. Why not give surfers the best of both worlds, having an AV player interface which takes elements from the old player and gives you a different menu for the regular Programmes (Panorama etc) and then gives you a category list? Sometimes I just want to watch all the most recent SciTech videos, for example, which was as easy as clicking through the list on the old player, but is nigh on impossible on the new one... There's only three videos per category! Consolidating all the available videos for a certain time period in sections on the page would be very useful and helpful, plus it would probably attract more eyes because when the content is easier to get to, people'll come back! I just feel there's room for improvement, and it'd be great to have a little area in the AV player where you can choose to watch N24, or the o' clock news broadcasts, or any of the programmes, all from one place with two clicks MAX - none of this faffing about having to go to the respective programme's page just to fire up the player with the relevant stream (although that can stay, because I'm sure people do it that way too if they're entering via that particular page). Just throwing these ideas into the pot..
RE: [backstage] Web 2.0 'neglecting good Accessible design'
I still think he needs to update his own web site though, it looks like it's stuck in the 90s. Do you mean useit.com? Agreed. I'm not saying Jakob has nothing to say but to paraphrase 80s ska combo Madness don't watch that, watch this..!: http://www.informationarchitects.jp/ Now, whether information architects have got anything to say or not is besides the point. They look and feel like they're operating in 2007 which means they're instantly more relevant to anyone building a site today. Just my 2p. -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Christopher Woods Sent: 22 May 2007 18:15 To: backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk Subject: RE: [backstage] Web 2.0 'neglecting good Accessible design' I get the feeling Nielson is deliberately provocative for the sake of it sometimes (although if it sparks discussion in an area, then hell why not). I still think he needs to update his own web site though, it looks like it's stuck in the 90s. I think I've said that before, too :/ -Original Message- From: Richard Lockwood [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: 22 May 2007 14:12 To: backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk Subject: Re: [backstage] Web 2.0 'neglecting good Accessible design' Something that every web developer capable of writing their own name without using Dreamweaver or Frontpage has been banging on about for the last 15 years. I don't see why Nielsen gets the credit for that one. :-) Cheers, Rich. On 5/22/07, Brian Butterworth [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: 'Minimize the number of text fields in your interfaces down to the absolute minimum necessary. Minimize the number of click/keystrokes/gestures necessary to accomplish actions in your interface. Make your interface as responsive as possible - minimize the latency of each and every action a user might take in your interface.' Something that Jakob Nielsen's been on about for about fifteen years, methinks. www.useit.com Brian Butterworth www.ukfree.tv -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Simon Cobb Sent: 22 May 2007 11:47 To: Simon Cobb; backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk Subject: RE: [backstage] Web 2.0 'neglecting good Accessible design' This was an interesting article on UI design. http://tantek.com/log/2007/02.html#d19t1813 It's from February so you may have already seen it. I found it referenced on the codinghorror blog which also has an article in praise of javascript (http://www.codinghorror.com/blog/archives/000857.html) -Original Message- From: Brian Butterworth [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: 16 May 2007 17:05 To: backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk Subject: RE: [backstage] Web 2.0 'neglecting good Accessible design' You may also like to try this site, it has access to Google, Microsoft, Ask and NASA mapping and satellite photos... http://www.flashearth.com/?lat=51.509979lon=-0.226138z=17.8; r=0src=msl It is easily iframed Brian Butterworth www.ukfree.tv -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Jason Cartwright Sent: 16 May 2007 09:34 To: backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk Subject: RE: [backstage] Web 2.0 'neglecting good Accessible design' Yes, javascript is required for the full, slick experience, obviously. All parts of the site are still usable when JS is off (that I can see), and seemingly entirely accessible via the keyboard. With JS on, the keys work in most browsers, although some require you to have the map in focus. Of course Google Maps has a well documented API that could be used to create uber-accessible versions for different needs - http://www.google.com/apis/maps/ J -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of ~:'' Sent: 15 May 2007 21:32 To: backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk Subject: Re: [backstage] Web 2.0 'neglecting good Accessible design' Jason Stephen, when javascript is disabled in Opera or Camino the message is: Your web browser is not fully supported by Google Maps I wonder is the code IE7 specific? none of the keys work for me on os x unless I'm missing something this hardly qualifies as accessible... regards Jonathan Chetwynd On 15 May 2007, at 16:57, Jason Cartwright wrote: Disable javascript. Everything works fine. J -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:owner- [EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of ~:'' Sent: 15 May 2007 16:47 To: backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk Subject: Re: [backstage] Web 2.0 'neglecting good Accessible design'
RE: [backstage] Web 2.0 'neglecting good Accessible design'
I think the answer is... http://www.useit.com/about/nographics.html Brian Butterworth www.ukfree.tv -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Christopher Woods Sent: 22 May 2007 18:15 To: backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk Subject: RE: [backstage] Web 2.0 'neglecting good Accessible design' I get the feeling Nielson is deliberately provocative for the sake of it sometimes (although if it sparks discussion in an area, then hell why not). I still think he needs to update his own web site though, it looks like it's stuck in the 90s. I think I've said that before, too :/ -Original Message- From: Richard Lockwood [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: 22 May 2007 14:12 To: backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk Subject: Re: [backstage] Web 2.0 'neglecting good Accessible design' Something that every web developer capable of writing their own name without using Dreamweaver or Frontpage has been banging on about for the last 15 years. I don't see why Nielsen gets the credit for that one. :-) Cheers, Rich. On 5/22/07, Brian Butterworth [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: 'Minimize the number of text fields in your interfaces down to the absolute minimum necessary. Minimize the number of click/keystrokes/gestures necessary to accomplish actions in your interface. Make your interface as responsive as possible - minimize the latency of each and every action a user might take in your interface.' Something that Jakob Nielsen's been on about for about fifteen years, methinks. www.useit.com Brian Butterworth www.ukfree.tv -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Simon Cobb Sent: 22 May 2007 11:47 To: Simon Cobb; backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk Subject: RE: [backstage] Web 2.0 'neglecting good Accessible design' This was an interesting article on UI design. http://tantek.com/log/2007/02.html#d19t1813 It's from February so you may have already seen it. I found it referenced on the codinghorror blog which also has an article in praise of javascript (http://www.codinghorror.com/blog/archives/000857.html) -Original Message- From: Brian Butterworth [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: 16 May 2007 17:05 To: backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk Subject: RE: [backstage] Web 2.0 'neglecting good Accessible design' You may also like to try this site, it has access to Google, Microsoft, Ask and NASA mapping and satellite photos... http://www.flashearth.com/?lat=51.509979lon=-0.226138z=17.8; r=0src=msl It is easily iframed Brian Butterworth www.ukfree.tv -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Jason Cartwright Sent: 16 May 2007 09:34 To: backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk Subject: RE: [backstage] Web 2.0 'neglecting good Accessible design' Yes, javascript is required for the full, slick experience, obviously. All parts of the site are still usable when JS is off (that I can see), and seemingly entirely accessible via the keyboard. With JS on, the keys work in most browsers, although some require you to have the map in focus. Of course Google Maps has a well documented API that could be used to create uber-accessible versions for different needs - http://www.google.com/apis/maps/ J -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of ~:'' Sent: 15 May 2007 21:32 To: backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk Subject: Re: [backstage] Web 2.0 'neglecting good Accessible design' Jason Stephen, when javascript is disabled in Opera or Camino the message is: Your web browser is not fully supported by Google Maps I wonder is the code IE7 specific? none of the keys work for me on os x unless I'm missing something this hardly qualifies as accessible... regards Jonathan Chetwynd On 15 May 2007, at 16:57, Jason Cartwright wrote: Disable javascript. Everything works fine. J -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:owner- [EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of ~:'' Sent: 15 May 2007 16:47 To: backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk Subject: Re: [backstage] Web 2.0 'neglecting good Accessible design' Richard, how does one use http://maps.google.com/ via the keyboard? cheers Jonathan Chetwynd On 15 May 2007, at 13:22, Richard Lockwood wrote: This
RE: [backstage] This one's for Cridland... BBC A/V interface ideas
The BBC News facility that works with Windows Media Center (XP or Vista) is a much better way to view these videos (when it works) and does much of what you describe. Personally, I've stuffed all the video feed URLs on an iGoogle tab... Brian Butterworth HYPERLINK http://www.ukfree.tv/www.ukfree.tv _ From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Christopher Woods Sent: 22 May 2007 18:35 To: backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk Subject: [backstage] This one's for Cridland... BBC A/V interface ideas Whilst on the subject of interface and UI design, I was thinking about the BBC site's design. So, the BBC has a burgeoning portfolio of online multimedia offerings, and they have their BBC Audio/Video link in the left bar of the BBC News site (and elsewhere on the site), but once you're actually on that page you're given a rather odd selection of videos. Why not give surfers the best of both worlds, having an AV player interface which takes elements from the old player and gives you a different menu for the regular Programmes (Panorama etc) and then gives you a category list? Sometimes I just want to watch all the most recent SciTech videos, for example, which was as easy as clicking through the list on the old player, but is nigh on impossible on the new one... There's only three videos per category! Consolidating all the available videos for a certain time period in sections on the page would be very useful and helpful, plus it would probably attract more eyes because when the content is easier to get to, people'll come back! I just feel there's room for improvement, and it'd be great to have a little area in the AV player where you can choose to watch N24, or the o' clock news broadcasts, or any of the programmes, all from one place with two clicks MAX - none of this faffing about having to go to the respective programme's page just to fire up the player with the relevant stream (although that can stay, because I'm sure people do it that way too if they're entering via that particular page). Just throwing these ideas into the pot.. No virus found in this incoming message. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.5.467 / Virus Database: 269.7.6/814 - Release Date: 21/05/2007 14:01 No virus found in this outgoing message. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.5.467 / Virus Database: 269.7.6/814 - Release Date: 21/05/2007 14:01
RE: [backstage] A decent editorially-ordered BBC News feed?
-Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of James Cridland Sent: 21 May 2007 13:58 To: backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk Subject: Re: [backstage] A decent editorially-ordered BBC News feed? They don't show the same for me. Which is odd. I've done a tracert - and I (through Demon) am apparently connecting to the NYC boxes, which is a little peculiar. hm, that may be your problem. Could you post your traceroute for news.bbc.co.uk and newsrss.bbc.co.uk? In our content production system, the RSS page and the HTML page templates both order the stories in the same editorially-defined order. There is sometimes a lag in publishing between our London servers and our New York servers - New York can be a little behind. If you are requesting from Demon you should be sent to the London servers, not New York. Here's my route from an easynet-hosted box: $ traceroute newsrss.bbc.co.uk traceroute to newsrss.bbc.net.uk (212.58.226.33), 64 hops max, 40 byte packets 1 fa2-0.pepo.router.flirble.org (194.70.3.1) 1.092 ms 1.271 ms 1.158 ms 2 fa5-0-103.cr1.bllon.uk.easynet.net (212.134.0.1) 0.865 ms 0.684 ms 0.574 ms 3 ge0-2-0-0.br1.bllon.uk.easynet.net (212.135.0.3) 0.868 ms 0.990 ms 0.868 ms 4 ge0-1-0.er4.bllon.uk.easynet.net (212.135.12.45) 0.721 ms 0.852 ms 1.310 ms 5 ge1-0-0.er3.tclon.uk.easynet.net (82.108.6.146) 2.496 ms 0.844 ms 0.866 ms 6 ge0-0-0.er3.thlon.uk.easynet.net (82.108.6.150) 1.014 ms 1.721 ms 1.601 ms 7 ip-217-204-60-121.easynet.co.uk (217.204.60.121) 1.014 ms 0.989 ms 1.305 ms 8 bbc-gw0-easynet.prt0.rbsov.bbc.co.uk (217.204.61.146) 2.185 ms 1.211 ms 1.634 ms 9 212.58.238.133 (212.58.238.133) 1.301 ms 1.437 ms 1.754 ms 10 newslb13.thdo.bbc.co.uk (212.58.226.33) 1.744 ms 1.773 ms 1.575 ms $ traceroute news.bbc.co.uk traceroute to newswww.bbc.net.uk (212.58.226.20), 64 hops max, 40 byte packets 1 fa2-0.pepo.router.flirble.org (194.70.3.1) 1.153 ms 1.069 ms 0.863 ms 2 fa5-0-103.cr1.bllon.uk.easynet.net (212.134.0.1) 0.718 ms 0.555 ms 0.574 ms 3 ge0-2-0-0.br1.bllon.uk.easynet.net (212.135.0.3) 1.015 ms 1.594 ms 1.138 ms 4 ge0-1-0.er4.bllon.uk.easynet.net (212.135.12.45) 0.719 ms 0.850 ms 1.022 ms 5 ge1-0-0.er3.tclon.uk.easynet.net (82.108.6.146) 1.448 ms 1.285 ms 0.739 ms 6 ge0-0-0.er3.thlon.uk.easynet.net (82.108.6.150) 1.439 ms 0.851 ms 1.015 ms 7 ip-217-204-60-225.easynet.co.uk (217.204.60.225) 1.454 ms 1.147 ms 1.303 ms 8 bbc-gw0-easynet.prt0.rbsov.bbc.co.uk (217.204.61.146) 143.265 ms 2.156 ms 5.292 ms 9 212.58.238.133 (212.58.238.133) 1.815 ms 1.585 ms 2.337 ms 10 newslb11.thdo.bbc.co.uk (212.58.226.20) 2.188 ms 2.614 ms 1.606 ms Does iGoogle support RSS simple list extensions http://blogs.msdn.com/rssteam/articles/SimpleListExtensionsExplained.asp x? We should use that to explicitly state the running order. Kevin. - Sent via the backstage.bbc.co.uk discussion group. To unsubscribe, please visit http://backstage.bbc.co.uk/archives/2005/01/mailing_list.html. Unofficial list archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk/
RE: [backstage] This one's for Cridland... BBC A/V interface ideas
(golly, mr cridland, looks like you've got the expectations of a whole darn mailing list on your shoulders?!? frankly, tho, first things first: i've got a whole stack of holiday leave forms waiting for you to sign when you're able? ah, the multi-faceted responsibilities of a newly-appointed dept. head... ;-) best-- --cs) -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] on behalf of Brian Butterworth Sent: Tue 5/22/2007 7:47 PM To: backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk Subject: RE: [backstage] This one's for Cridland... BBC A/V interface ideas The BBC News facility that works with Windows Media Center (XP or Vista) is a much better way to view these videos (when it works) and does much of what you describe. Personally, I've stuffed all the video feed URLs on an iGoogle tab... Brian Butterworth HYPERLINK http://www.ukfree.tv/www.ukfree.tv _ From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Christopher Woods Sent: 22 May 2007 18:35 To: backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk Subject: [backstage] This one's for Cridland... BBC A/V interface ideas Whilst on the subject of interface and UI design, I was thinking about the BBC site's design. So, the BBC has a burgeoning portfolio of online multimedia offerings, and they have their BBC Audio/Video link in the left bar of the BBC News site (and elsewhere on the site), but once you're actually on that page you're given a rather odd selection of videos. Why not give surfers the best of both worlds, having an AV player interface which takes elements from the old player and gives you a different menu for the regular Programmes (Panorama etc) and then gives you a category list? Sometimes I just want to watch all the most recent SciTech videos, for example, which was as easy as clicking through the list on the old player, but is nigh on impossible on the new one... There's only three videos per category! Consolidating all the available videos for a certain time period in sections on the page would be very useful and helpful, plus it would probably attract more eyes because when the content is easier to get to, people'll come back! I just feel there's room for improvement, and it'd be great to have a little area in the AV player where you can choose to watch N24, or the o' clock news broadcasts, or any of the programmes, all from one place with two clicks MAX - none of this faffing about having to go to the respective programme's page just to fire up the player with the relevant stream (although that can stay, because I'm sure people do it that way too if they're entering via that particular page). Just throwing these ideas into the pot.. No virus found in this incoming message. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.5.467 / Virus Database: 269.7.6/814 - Release Date: 21/05/2007 14:01 No virus found in this outgoing message. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.5.467 / Virus Database: 269.7.6/814 - Release Date: 21/05/2007 14:01
RE: [backstage] This one's for Cridland... BBC A/V interface ideas
Haha :D Careful though, now you've revealed your address to us lot you'll no doubt have emails flying your way with suggestions or requests for changes regarding your multimedia offerings ;) The last email was just directed in the area of your new boss because I know he reads this list ;) _ From: Chris Sizemore [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: 22 May 2007 22:28 To: backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk; backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk Subject: RE: [backstage] This one's for Cridland... BBC A/V interface ideas Importance: Low (golly, mr cridland, looks like you've got the expectations of a whole darn mailing list on your shoulders?!? frankly, tho, first things first: i've got a whole stack of holiday leave forms waiting for you to sign when you're able? ah, the multi-faceted responsibilities of a newly-appointed dept. head... ;-) best-- --cs) -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] on behalf of Brian Butterworth Sent: Tue 5/22/2007 7:47 PM To: backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk Subject: RE: [backstage] This one's for Cridland... BBC A/V interface ideas The BBC News facility that works with Windows Media Center (XP or Vista) is a much better way to view these videos (when it works) and does much of what you describe. Personally, I've stuffed all the video feed URLs on an iGoogle tab... Brian Butterworth HYPERLINK http://www.ukfree.tv/www.ukfree.tv _ From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Christopher Woods Sent: 22 May 2007 18:35 To: backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk Subject: [backstage] This one's for Cridland... BBC A/V interface ideas Whilst on the subject of interface and UI design, I was thinking about the BBC site's design. So, the BBC has a burgeoning portfolio of online multimedia offerings, and they have their BBC Audio/Video link in the left bar of the BBC News site (and elsewhere on the site), but once you're actually on that page you're given a rather odd selection of videos. Why not give surfers the best of both worlds, having an AV player interface which takes elements from the old player and gives you a different menu for the regular Programmes (Panorama etc) and then gives you a category list? Sometimes I just want to watch all the most recent SciTech videos, for example, which was as easy as clicking through the list on the old player, but is nigh on impossible on the new one... There's only three videos per category! Consolidating all the available videos for a certain time period in sections on the page would be very useful and helpful, plus it would probably attract more eyes because when the content is easier to get to, people'll come back! I just feel there's room for improvement, and it'd be great to have a little area in the AV player where you can choose to watch N24, or the o' clock news broadcasts, or any of the programmes, all from one place with two clicks MAX - none of this faffing about having to go to the respective programme's page just to fire up the player with the relevant stream (although that can stay, because I'm sure people do it that way too if they're entering via that particular page). Just throwing these ideas into the pot.. No virus found in this incoming message. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.5.467 / Virus Database: 269.7.6/814 - Release Date: 21/05/2007 14:01 No virus found in this outgoing message. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.5.467 / Virus Database: 269.7.6/814 - Release Date: 21/05/2007 14:01
