| 267 |
Taming Complexity |
I’m going to step into my UX trousers for this one. I wouldn’t usually wear them in public, but it’s Christmas, so there’s nothing wrong with looking silly.
Anyway, to business. Wherever I roam, I hear the familiar call for simplicity and the denouncement of complexity. I read often that the simpler something is, the more usable it will be. We understand that simple is hard to achieve, but we push for it nonetheless, convinced it will make what we build easier to use. Simple is better, right?
Well, I’ll try to explore that. Much of what follows will not be revelatory to some but, like all good lessons, I think this serves as a welcome reminder that as we live in a complex world it’s OK to sometimes reflect that complexity in the products we build.
Myths and legends
Less is more, we’ve been told, ever since master of poetic verse Robert Browning used the phrase in 1855. Well, I’ve conducted some research, and it appears he knew nothing of web design. Neither did modernist architect Ludwig Mies van der Rohe, a later pedlar of this worthy yet contradictory notion. Broad is narrow. Tall is short. Eggs are chips. See: anyone can come up with this stuff.
To paraphrase Einstein, simple doesn’t have to be simpler. In other words, simple doesn’t dictate that we remove the complexity. Complex doesn’t have to be confusing; it can be beautiful and elegant. On the web, complex can be necessary and powerful. A website that simplifies the lives of its users by offering them everything they need in one site or screen is powerful. For some, the greater the density of information, the more useful the site.
In our decision-making process, principles such as Occam’s razor’s_razor (in a nutshell: simple is better than complex) are useful, but simple is for the user to determine through their initial impression and subsequent engagement. What appears simple to me or you might appear very complex to someone else, based on their own mental model or needs. We can aim to deliver simple, but they’ll be the judge.
As a designer, developer, content alchemist, user experience discombobulator, or whatever you call yourself, you’re often wrestling with a wealth of material, a huge number of features, and numerous objectives. In many cases, much of that stuff is extraneous, and goes in the dustbin. However, it can be just as likely that there’s a truckload of suggested features and content because it all needs to be there. Don’t be afraid of that weight.
In the right hands, less can indeed mean more, but it’s just as likely that less can very often lead to, well… less.
Complexity is powerful
Simple is the ability to offer a powerful experience without overwhelming the audience or inducing information anxiety. Giving them everything they need, without having them ferret off all over a site to get things done, is important.
It’s useful to ask throughout a site’s lifespan, “does the user have everything they need?” It’s so easy to let our designer egos get in the way and chop stuff out, reduce down to only the things we want to see. That benefits us in the short term, but compromises the audience long-term.
The trick is not to be afraid of complexity in itself, but to avoid creating the perception of complexity. Give a user a flight simulator and they’ll crash the plane or jump out. Give them everything they need and more, but make it feel simple, and you’re building a relationship, empowering people.
This can be achieved carefully with what some call gradual engagement, and often the sensible thing might be to unleash complexity in carefully orchestrated phases, initially setting manageable levels of engagement and interaction, gradually increasing the inherent power of the product and fostering an empowered community.
The design aesthetic
Here’s a familiar scenario: the client or project lead gets overexcited and skips most of the important decision-making, instead barrelling straight into a bout of creative direction Tourette’s. Visually, the design needs to be minimal, white, crisp, full of white space, have big buttons, and quite likely be “clean”. Of course, we all like our websites to be clean as that’s more hygienic.
But what do these words even mean, really? Early in a project they’re abstract distractions, unnecessary constraints. This premature narrowing forces us to think much more about throwing stuff out rather than acknowledging that what we’re building is complex, and many of the components perhaps necessary.
Simple is not a formula. It cannot be achieved just by using a white background, by throwing things away, or by breathing a bellowsful of air in between every element and having it all float around in space. Simple is not a design treatment. Simple is hard. Simple requires deep investigation, a thorough understanding of every aspect of a project, in line with the needs and expectations of the audience.
Recognizing this helps us empathize a little more with those most vocal of UX practitioners. They usually appreciate that our successes depend on a thorough understanding of the user’s mental models and expected outcomes. I personally still consider UX people to be web designers like the rest of us (mainly to wind them up), but they’re web designers that design every decision, and by putting the user experience at the heart of their process, they have a greater chance of finding simplicity in complexity. The visual design aesthetic — the façade — is only a part of that.
Divide and conquer
I’m currently working on an app that’s complex in architecture, and complex in ambition. We’ll be releasing in carefully orchestrated private phases, gradually introducing more complexity in line with the unavoidably complex nature of the objective, but my job is to design the whole, the complete system as it will be when it’s out of beta and beyond.
I’ve noticed that I’m not throwing much out; most of it needs to be there. Therefore, my responsibility is to consider interesting and appropriate methods of navigation and bring everything together logically.
I’m using things like smart defaults, graphical timelines and colour keys to make sense of the complexity, techniques that are sympathetic to the content. They act as familiar points of navigation and reference, yet are malleable enough to change subtly to remain relevant to the information they connect. It’s really OK to have a lot of stuff, so long as we make each component work smartly.
It’s a divide and conquer approach. By finding simplicity and logic in each content bucket, I’ve made more sense of the whole, allowing me to create key layouts where most of the simplified buckets are collated and sometimes combined, providing everything the user needs and expects in the appropriate places.
I’m also making sure I don’t reduce the app’s power. I need to reflect the scale of opportunity, and provide access to or knowledge of the more advanced tools and features for everyone: a window into what they can do and how they can help. I know it’s the minority who will be actively building the content, but the power is in providing those opportunities for all.
Much of this will be familiar to the responsible practitioners who build websites for government, local authorities, utility companies, newspapers, magazines, banking, and we-sell-everything-ever-made online shops. Across the web, there are sites and tools that thrive on complexity.
Alas, the majority of such sites have done little to make navigation intuitive, or empower audiences. Where we can make a difference is by striving to make our UIs feel simple, look wonderful, not intimidating — even if they’re mind-meltingly complex behind that façade.
Embrace, empathize and tame
So, there are loads of ways to exploit complexity, and make it seem simple. I’ve hinted at some methods above, and we’ve already looked at gradual engagement as a way to make sense of complexity, so that’s a big thumbs-up for a release cycle that increases audience power.
Prior to each and every release, it’s also useful to rest on the finished thing for a while and use it yourself, even if you’re itching to release. ‘Ready’ often isn’t, and ‘finished’ never is, and the more time you spend browsing around the sites you build, the more you learn what to question, where to add, or subtract. It’s definitely worth building in some contingency time for sitting on your work, so to speak.
One thing I always do is squint at my layouts. By squinting, I get a sort of abstract idea of the overall composition, and general feel for the thing. It makes my face look stupid, but helps me see how various buckets fit together, and how simple or complex the site feels overall.
I mentioned the need to put our design egos to one side and not throw out anything useful, and I think that’s vital. I’m a big believer in economy, reduction, and removing the extraneous, but I’m usually referring to decoration, bells and whistles, and fluff. I wouldn’t ever advocate the complete removal of powerful content from a project roadmap.
Above all, don’t fear complexity. Embrace and tame it. Work hard to empathize with audience needs, and you can create elegant, playful, risky, surprising, emotive, delightful, and ultimately simple things. |
2011 |
Simon Collison |
simoncollison |
2011-12-21T00:00:00+00:00 |
https://24ways.org/2011/taming-complexity/ |
ux |
| 268 |
Getting the Most Out of Google Analytics |
Something a bit different for today’s 24 ways article. For starters, I’m not a designer or a developer. I’m an evil man who sells things to people on the internet. Second, this article will likely be a little more nebulous than you’re used to, since it covers quite a number of points in a relatively short space.
This isn’t going to be the complete Google Analytics Conversion University IQ course compressed into a single article, obviously. What it will be, however, is a primer on setting up and using Google Analytics in real life, and a great deal of what I’ve learned using Google Analytics nearly every working day for the past six (crikey!) years.
Also, to be clear, I’ll be referencing new Google Analytics here; old Google Analytics is for loooosers (and those who want reliable e-commerce conversion data per site search term, natch).
You may have been running your Analytics account for several years now, dipping in and out, checking traffic levels, seeing what’s popular… and that’s about it. Google Analytics provides so much more than that, but the number of reports available can often intimidate users, and documentation and case studies on their use are minimal at best.
Let’s start! Setting up your Analytics profile
Before we plough on, I just want to run through a quick checklist that some basic settings have been enabled for your profile. If you haven’t clicked it, click the big cog on the top-right of Google Analytics and we’ll have a poke about.
If you have an e-commerce site, e-commerce tracking has been enabled
If your site has a search function, site search tracking has been enabled.
Query string parameters that you do not want tracked as separate pages have been excluded (for example, any parameters needed for your platform to function, otherwise you’ll get multiple entries for the same page appearing in your reports)
Filters have been enabled on your main profile to exclude your office IP address and any IPs of people who frequently access the site for work purposes. In decent numbers they tend to throw data off a tad.
You may also find the need to set up multiple profiles prefiltered for specific audience segments. For example, at Lovehoney we have seventeen separate profiles that allow me quick access to certain countries, devices and traffic sources without having to segment first. You’ll also find load time for any complex reports much improved. Use the same filter screen as above to set up a series of profiles that only include, say, mobile visits, or UK visitors, so you can quickly analyse important segments.
Matt, what’s a segment?
A segment is a subsection of your visitor base, which you define and then call on in reports to see specific data for that subsection. For example, in this report I’ve defined two segments, the first for IE6 users and the second for IE7.
Segments are easily created by clicking the Advanced Segments tabs at the top of any report and clicking +New Custom Segment.
What does your site do?
Understanding the goals of your site is an oft-covered topic, but it’s necessary not just to form a better understand of your business and prioritize your time. Understanding what you wish visitors to do on your site translates well into a goal-driven analytics package like Google Analytics.
Every site exists essentially to sell something, either financially through e-commerce, or to sell an idea or impart information, get people to download a CV or enquire about service, or to sell space on that website to advertisers. If the site did not provide a positive benefit to its owners, it would not have a reason for being.
Once you have understood the reason why you have a site, you can map that reason on to one of the three goal types Google Analytics provides.
E-commerce
This conversion type registers transactions as part of a sales process which requires a monetary value, what products have been bought, an SKU (stock keeping unit), affiliation (if you’re then attributing the sale to a third party or franchise) and so on.
The benefit of e-commerce tracking is not only assigning non-arbitrary monetary value to behaviour of visitors on your site, as well as being able to see ancillary costs such as shipping, but seeing product-level information, like which products are preferred from various channels, popular categories, and so on.
However, I find the e-commerce tracking options also useful for non-e-commerce sites. For example, if you’re offering downloads or subscriptions and having an email address or user’s details is worth something to you, you can set up e-commerce tracking to understand how much value your site is bringing. For example, an email address might be worth 20p to you, but if it also includes a name it’s worth 50p. A contact telephone number is worth £2, and so on.
Page goals
Page goals, unsurprisingly, track a visit to a page (often with a sequence of pages leading up to that page). This is what’s referred to as a goal funnel, and is generally used to track how visitors behave in a multistep checkout.
Interestingly, the page doesn’t have to actually exist. For example, if you have a single page checkout, you can register virtual page views using trackPageview() when a visitor clicks into a particular section of the checkout or other form. If your site is geared towards getting someone to a particular page, but where there isn’t a transaction (for example, a subscription page) this is for you.
There are also behavioural goals, such as time on site and number of pages viewed, which are geared towards sites that make money from advertising.
But, going back to the page goals, these can be abstracted using regular expressions, meaning that you can define a funnel based on page type rather than having to set individual folders.
In this example, I’ve created regexes for the main page types on my site, so I can create a wide funnel that captures visitors from where they enter through to checkout.
Events
Event tracking registers a predefined event, such as playing a video, or some interaction that can trigger JavaScript, such as a Tweet This button. Events can then be triggered using the trackEvent() call. If you want someone to complete watching a video, you would code your player to fire trackEvent() upon completion.
While I don’t use events as goals, I use events elsewhere to see how well a video play aids to conversion. This not only helps me justify the additional spend on creating video content, but also quickly highlights which videos are underperforming as sales tools.
What a visitor can tell you
Now you have some proper goals set up, we can start to see how changes in content (on-site and external) affect those goals.
Ultimately, when a visitor comes to your site, they bring information with them:
where they came from (a search engine – including: keyword searched for; a referral; direct; affiliate; or ad campaign)
demographics (country; whether they’re new or returning, within thirty days)
technical information (browser; screen size; device; bandwidth)
site-specific information (landing page; next click; previous values assigned to them as custom variables*)
* A note about custom variables. There’s no hope in hell that I can cover custom variables in this article. Go research them. Custom variables are the single best way to hack Google Analytics and bend it to your will. Custom variables allow you to record anything you want about a visitor, which that visitor will then carry around with them between visits. It’s also great for plugging other services into Google Analytics (as shown by the marvelous way Visual Website Optimizer allows you to track and segment tests within the GA interface). Just make sure not to breach the terms of service, eh?
CSI your website
Police procedural TV shows are all the same: the investigators are called to a crime and come across a clue; there’s then an autopsy; new evidence leads them to a new location; they find a new clue; they put two and two together; they solve the mystery.
This is your life now. Exciting!
So, now you’re gathering a wealth of information about what sort of people visit your site, what they do when they’re there, and what eventually gets them to drive value to you. It’s now your job to investigate all these little clues to see which types of people drive the most value, and what you can change to improve it.
Maybe not that exciting.
However, Google Analytics comes pre-armed with extensive reports for you to delve into. As an e-commerce guy (as opposed to a page goal guy) my day pretty much follows the pattern below.
Look at e-commerce conversion rate by traffic source compared to the same day in the previous week and previous month. As ours is an e-commerce site, we have weekly and monthly trends. A big spike on Sundays and Mondays, and payday towards the end of the month is always good; on the third week of a month there tends to be a lull. Spend time letting your Google Analytics data brew, understand your own trends and patterns, and you’ll start to get a feel for when something isn’t quite right.
Traffic Sources → Sources → All Traffic
Look at the conversion rate by landing page for any traffic source that feels significantly different to what’s expected. Check bounce rates, drill down to likely landing pages and check search keyword or referral site to see if it’s a particular subset of visitor. You can do this by clicking Secondary Dimension and choosing Keyword or Source. If it’s direct, choose Visitor Type to break down by new or returning visitor.
Content → Site Content → Landing Pages
I then tend to flip into Content Drilldown to see what the next clicks were from those landing pages, and whether they changed significantly to the date I’m comparing with. If they have, that’s usually an indicator of changed content (or its relevancy). Remember, if a bunch of people have found their way to your page via a method you’re not expecting (such as a mention on a Spanish radio station – this actually happened to me once), while the content hasn’t changed, the relevancy of it to the audience may have.
Content → Site Content → Content Drilldown
Once I have an idea of what content was consumed, and whether it was relevant to the user, I then look at the visitor specifics, such as browser or demographic data, to see again whether the change was limited to a specific subset. Site speed, for example, is normally a good factor towards bounce rate, so compare that with previous data as well.
Now, to be investigating at this level you still need a serious amount of data, in order to tell what’s a significant change or not. If you’re struggling with a small number of visitors, you might find reporting on a weekly or fortnightly basis more appropriate.
However, once you’ve looked into the basics of why changes happen to the value of your site, you’ll soon find yourself limited by the reports offered in Standard Reporting. So, it’s time to build your own. Hooray!
Custom reporting
Google Analytics provides the tools to build reports specific to the types of investigations you frequently perform.
Welcome to my world.
Custom reports are quite simple to build: first, you determine the metric you want the report to cover (number of visitors, bounce rate, conversion rate, and so on), then choose a set of dimensions that you’d like to segment the report by (say, the source of the traffic, and whether they were new or returning users). You can filter the report, including or excluding particular dimension values, and you can assign the report to any of the profiles you created earlier.
In the example below, I’ve created a report that shows me visits and conversion rate for any Google traffic that landed directly only on a product page. I can then drill down on each product page to see the complete phrases use to search. I can use this information in two ways:
I can see which products aren’t converting, which shows me where I need to work harder on merchandising.
I can give this information to my content team, showing them the actual phrases visitors used to reach our product content, helping them write better targeted product descriptions.
The possibilities here are nearly endless, but here are a few examples of reports I find useful:
Non-brand inbound search
By creating a report that shows inbound search traffic which doesn’t include your brand, you can see more clearly the behaviour of visitors most likely to be unfamiliar with your site and brand values, without having to rely on the clumsy new or returning demographic date.
Traffic/conversion/sales by hour
This is pure stats porn, but actually more useful than real-time data. By seeing this data broken down at an hourly level, you can not only compare the current day to previous days, but also see the best performing times for email broadcasts and tweets.
Visits, load time, conversion and sales by page and browser
Page speed can often kill conversion rates, but it’s difficult to prove the value of focusing on speed in monetary terms. Having this report to hand helps me drive Operation Greenbelt, our effort to get into the sub-1.5 second band in Google Webmaster Tools.
Useful things you can’t do in custom reporting
If you have a search function on your website, then Conversion Rate and Products Bought by Site Search Term is an incredibly useful report that allows you to measure the effectiveness of your site’s search engine at returning products and content related to the search term used. By including the products actually bought by visitors who searched for each term, you can use this information to better searchandise these results, escalating high propensity and high value products to the top of the results.
However, it’s not possible to get this information out of new Google Analytics.
Try it, select the following in the report builder:
Metrics: total unique searches; e-commerce or goal conversion rate
Dimensions: search term; product
You’ll see that the data returned is a little nonsensical, though a 2,000% conversion rate would be nice. However, you can get more accurate information using advanced segments. By creating individual segments to define users who have searched for a particular term, you can run the sales performance and product performance reports as normal. It’s laborious, but it teaches a good lesson: data that seems inaccessible can normally be found another way!
Reporting infrastructure
Now that you have a series of reports that you can refer to on a daily or weekly basis, it’s time to put together a regular reporting infrastructure.
Even if you’re not reporting to someone, having a set of key performance indicators that you can use to see how your performance is improving over time allows you to set yourself business goals on a monthly and annual basis.
For my own reporting, I take some high-level metrics (such as visitors, conversion rate and average order value), and segment them by traffic source and, separately, landing page. These statistics I record weekly and report:
current week compared with previous week
same week previous year (if available)
4 week average
13 week average
52 week average (if available)
This takes into account weekly, monthly, seasonal and annual trends, and gives you a much clearer view of your performance.
Getting data in other ways
If you’re using Google Analytics frequently, with any large site you’ll come to a couple of conclusions:
Doing any kind of practical comparative analysis is unwieldy.
Boy, Google Analytics is slow!
As you work with bigger datasets and put together more complex queries, you’ll see the loading graphic more than you’ll see actual data. So when you reach that level, there are ways to completely bypass the Google Analytics interface altogether, and get data into your own spreadsheet application for manipulation.
Data Feed Query Explorer
If you just want to pull down some quick statistics but still use complex filters and exotic metric and dimension combinations, the Data Feed Query Explorer is the quickest way of doing so. Authenticate with your Google Analytics account, select a profile, and you can start selecting metrics and dimensions to be generated in a handy, selectable tabulated format.
Google Analytics API
If you’re feeling clever, you can bypass having to copy and paste data by pulling in directly into Excel, Google Docs or your own application using the Google Analytics API. There are several scripts and plugins available to do this. I use Automate Analytics Google Docs code (there’s also a paid version that simplifies setup and creates some handy reports for you).
New shiny things
Well, now that that’s over, I can show you some cool stuff. Well, at least it’s cool to me. Google Analytics is being constantly improved and new functionality is introduced nearly every month. Here are a couple of my favourites.
Multichannel attribution
Not every visitor converts on your site on the first visit. They may not even do so on the second visit, or third. If they convert on the fourth visit, but each time they visit they do so via a different channel (for example, Search PPC, Search Organic, Direct, Email), which channel do you attribute the conversion to? The last channel, or the first? Dilemma!
Google now has a Multichannel Attribution report, available in the Conversion category, which shows how each channel assists in converting, the overlap between channels, and where in the process that channel was important.
For example, you may have analysed your blog traffic from Twitter and become disheartened that not many people were subscribing after visiting from Twitter links, but instead your high-value subscribers were coming from natural search. On the face of it, you’d spend less time tweeting, but a multichannel report may tell you that visitors first arrived via a Twitter link and didn’t subscribe, but then came back later after searching for your blog name on Google, after which they did. Don’t pack Twitter in yet!
Visitor and goal flow
Visitor and goal flow are amazing reports that help you visualize the flow of traffic through your site and, ultimately, into your checkout funnel or similar goal path. Flow reports are perfect for understanding drop-off points in your process, as well as what the big draws are on each page.
Previously, if you wanted to visualize this data you had to set up several abstracted microgoals and chain them together in custom reports. Frankly, it was a pain in the arse and burned through your precious and limited goal allocation.
Visitor flow bypasses all that and produces the report in an interactive flow diagram. While it doesn’t show you the holy grail of conversion likelihood by each path, you can segment visitor flow so that you can see very specifically how different segments of your visitor base behave.
Go play with it now! |
2011 |
Matt Curry |
mattcurry |
2011-12-18T00:00:00+00:00 |
https://24ways.org/2011/getting-the-most-out-of-google-analytics/ |
business |
| 275 |
Context First: Web Strategy in Four Handy Ws |
Many, many years ago, before web design became my proper job, I trained and worked as a journalist. I studied publishing in London and spent three fun years learning how to take a few little nuggets of information and turn them into a story. I learned a bunch of stuff that has all been a huge help to my design career. Flatplanning, layout, typographic theory. All of these disciplines have since translated really well to web design, but without doubt the most useful thing I learned was how to ask difficult questions.
Pretty much from day one of journalism school they hammer into you the importance of the Five Ws. Five disarmingly simple lines of enquiry that eloquently manage to provide the meat of any decent story. And with alliteration thrown in too. For a young journo, it’s almost too good to be true.
Who? What? Where? When? Why? It seems so obvious to almost be trite but, fundamentally, any story that manages to answer those questions for the reader is doing a pretty good job. You’ll probably have noticed feeling underwhelmed by certain news pieces in the past – disappointed, like something was missing. Some irritating oversight that really lets the story down. No doubt it was one of the Ws – those innocuous little suckers are generally only noticeable by their absence, but they sure get missed when they’re not there.
Question everything
I’ve always been curious. An inveterate tinkerer with things and asker of dopey questions, often to the point of abject annoyance for anyone unfortunate enough to have ended up in my line of fire. So, naturally, the Five Ws started drifting into other areas of my life. I’d scrutinize everything, trying to justify or explain my rationale using these Ws, but I’d also find myself ripping apart the stuff that clearly couldn’t justify itself against the same criteria.
So when I started working as a designer I applied the same logic and, sure enough, the Ws pretty much mapped to the exact same needs we had for gathering requirements at the start of a project. It seemed so obvious, such a simple way to establish the purpose of a product. What was it for? Why we were making it? And, of course, who were we making it for? It forced clients to stop and think, when really what they wanted was to get going and see something shiny. Sometimes that was a tricky conversation to have, but it’s no coincidence that those who got it also understood the value of strategy and went on to have good solid products, while those that didn’t often ended up with arrogantly insular and very shiny but ultimately unsatisfying and expendable products. Empty vessels make the most noise and all that…
Content first
I was both surprised and pleased when the whole content first idea started to rear its head a couple of years back. Pleased, because without doubt it’s absolutely the right way to work. And surprised, because personally it’s always been the way I’ve done it – I wasn’t aware there was even an alternative way. Content in some form or another is the whole reason we were making the things we were making. I can’t even imagine how you’d start figuring out what a site needs to do, how it should be structured, or how it should look without a really good idea of what that content might be. It baffles me still that this was somehow news to a lot of people. What on earth were they doing? Design without purpose is just folly, surely?
It’s great to see the idea gaining momentum but, having watched it unfold, it occurred to me recently that although it’s fantastic to see a tangible shift in thinking – away from those bleak times, where making things up was somehow deemed an appropriate way to do things – there’s now a new bad guy in town.
With any buzzword solution of the moment, there’s always a catch, and it seems like some have taken the content first approach a little too literally. By which I mean, it’s literally the first thing they do. The project starts, there’s a very cursory nod towards gathering requirements, and off they go, cranking content. Writing copy, making video, commissioning illustrations.
All that’s happened is that the ‘making stuff up’ part has shifted along the line, away from layout and UI, back to the content.
Starting is too easy
I can’t remember where I first heard that phrase, but it’s a great sentiment which applies to so much of what we do on the web. The medium is so accessible and to an extent disposable; throwing things together quickly carries far less burden than in any other industry. We’re used to tweaking as we go, changing bits, iterating things into shape. The ubiquitous beta tag has become the ultimate caveat, and has made the unfinished and unpolished acceptable. Of course, that can work brilliantly in some circumstances. Occasionally, a product offers such a paradigm shift it’s beyond the level of deep planning and prelaunch finessing we’d ideally like. But, in the main, for most client sites we work on, there really is no excuse not to do things properly. To ask the tricky questions, to challenge preconceptions and really understand the Ws behind the products we’re making before we even start.
The four Ws
For product definition, only four of the five Ws really apply, although there’s a lot of discussion around the idea of when being an influencing factor. For example, the context of a user’s engagement with your product is something you can make a call on depending on the specifics of the project.
So, here’s my take on the four essential Ws. I’ll point out here that, of course, these are not intended to be autocratic dictums. Your needs may differ, your clients’ needs may differ, but these four starting points will get you pretty close to where you need to be.
Who
It’s surprising just how many projects start without a real understanding of the intended audience. Many clients think they have an idea, but without really knowing – it’s presumptive at best, and we all know what presumption is the mother of, right? Of course, we can’t know our audiences in the same way a small shop owner might know their customers. But we can at least strive to find out what type of people are likely to be using the product. I’m not talking about deep user research. That should come later.
These are the absolute basics. What’s the context for their visit? How informed are they? What’s their level of comprehension? Are they able to self-identify and relate to categories you have created? I could go on, and it changes on a per-project basis. You’ll only find this out by speaking to them, if not in person, then indirectly through surveys, questionnaires or polls. The mechanism is less important than actually reaching out and engaging with them, because without that understanding it’s impossible to start to design with any empathy.
What
Once you become deeply involved directly with a product or service, it’s notoriously difficult to see things as an outsider would. You learn the thing inside and out, you develop shortcuts and internal phraseology. Colloquialisms creep in. You become too close. So it’s no surprise when clients sometimes struggle to explain what it is their product actually does in a way that others can understand.
Often products are complex but, really, the core reasons behind someone wanting to use that product are very simple. There’s a value proposition for the customer and, if they choose to engage with it, there’s a value exchange. If that proposition or exchange isn’t transparent, then people become confused and will likely go elsewhere. Make sure both your client and you really understand what that proposition is and, in turn, what the expected exchange should be. In a nutshell: what is the intended outcome of that engagement? Often the best way to do this is strip everything back to nothing. Verbosity is rife on the web. Just because it’s easy to create content, that shouldn’t be a reason to do so. Figure out what the value proposition is and then reintroduce content elements that genuinely help explain or present that to a level that is appropriate for the audience.
Why
In advertising, they talk about the truths behind a product or service. Truths can be both tangible or abstract, but the most important part is the resonance those truths hit with a customer. In a digital product or service those truths are often exposed as benefits. Why is this what I need? Why will it work for me? Why should I trust you? The why is one of the more fluffy Ws, yet it’s such an important one to nail. Clients can get prickly when you ask them to justify the why behind their product, but it’s a fantastic way to make sure the value proposition is clear, realistic and meets with the expectations of both client and customer.
It’s our job as designers to question things: we’re not just a pair of hands for clients. Just recently I spoke to a potential client about a site for his business. I asked him why people would use his product and also why his product seemed so fractured in its direction. He couldnt answer that question so, instead of ploughing on regardless, he went back to his directors and is now re-evaluating that business. It was awkward but he thanked me and hopefully he’ll have a better product as a result.
Where
In this instance, where is not so much a geographical thing, although in some cases that level of context may indeed become a influencing factor… The where we’re talking about here is the position of the product in relation to others around it. By looking at competitors or similar services around the one you are designing, you can start to get a sense for many of the things that are otherwise hard to pin down or have yet to be defined. For example, in a collection of sites all selling cars, where does yours fit most closely? Where are the overlaps? How are they communicating to their customers? How is the product range presented or categorized?
It’s good to look around and see how others are doing it. Not in a quest for homogeneity but more to reference or to avoid certain patterns that may or may not make sense for your own particular product. Clients often strive to be different for the sake of it. They feel they need to provide distinction by going against the flow a bit. We know different. We know users love convention. They embrace familiar mental models. They’re comfortable with things that they’ve experienced elsewhere. By showing your client that position is a vital part of their strategy, you can help shape their product into something great.
To conclude
So there we have it – the four Ws. Each part tells a different and vital part of the story you need to be able to make a really good product. It might sound like a lot of work, particularly when the client is breathing down your neck expecting to see things, but without those pieces in place, the story you’re building your product on, and the content that you’re creating to form that product can only ever fit into one genre. Fiction. |
2011 |
Alex Morris |
alexmorris |
2011-12-10T00:00:00+00:00 |
https://24ways.org/2011/context-first/ |
content |
| 276 |
Your jQuery: Now With 67% Less Suck |
Fun fact: more websites are now using jQuery than Flash.
jQuery is an amazing tool that’s made JavaScript accessible to developers and designers of all levels of experience. However, as Spiderman taught us, “with great power comes great responsibility.” The unfortunate downside to jQuery is that while it makes it easy to write JavaScript, it makes it easy to write really really f*&#ing bad JavaScript. Scripts that slow down page load, unresponsive user interfaces, and spaghetti code knotted so deep that it should come with a bottle of whiskey for the next sucker developer that has to work on it.
This becomes more important for those of us who have yet to move into the magical fairy wonderland where none of our clients or users view our pages in Internet Explorer. The IE JavaScript engine moves at the speed of an advancing glacier compared to more modern browsers, so optimizing our code for performance takes on an even higher level of urgency.
Thankfully, there are a few very simple things anyone can add into their jQuery workflow that can clear up a lot of basic problems. When undertaking code reviews, three of the areas where I consistently see the biggest problems are: inefficient selectors; poor event delegation; and clunky DOM manipulation. We’ll tackle all three of these and hopefully you’ll walk away with some new jQuery batarangs to toss around in your next project.
Selector optimization
Selector speed: fast or slow?
Saying that the power behind jQuery comes from its ability to select DOM elements and act on them is like saying that Photoshop is a really good tool for selecting pixels on screen and making them change color – it’s a bit of a gross oversimplification, but the fact remains that jQuery gives us a ton of ways to choose which element or elements in a page we want to work with. However, a surprising number of web developers are unaware that all selectors are not created equal; in fact, it’s incredible just how drastic the performance difference can be between two selectors that, at first glance, appear nearly identical. For instance, consider these two ways of selecting all paragraph tags inside a <div> with an ID.
$("#id p");
$("#id").find("p");
Would it surprise you to learn that the second way can be more than twice as fast as the first? Knowing which selectors outperform others (and why) is a pretty key building block in making sure your code runs well and doesn’t frustrate your users waiting for things to happen.
There are many different ways to select elements using jQuery, but the most common ways can be basically broken down into five different methods. In order, roughly, from fastest to slowest, these are:
$("#id");
This is without a doubt the fastest selector jQuery provides because it maps directly to the native document.getElementbyId() JavaScript method. If possible, the selectors listed below should be prefaced with an ID selector in conjunction with jQuery’s .find() method to limit the scope of the page that has to be searched (as in the $("#id").find("p") example shown above).
$("p");, $("input");, $("form"); and so on
Selecting elements by tag name is also fast, since it maps directly to the native document.getElementsByTagname() method.
$(".class");
Selecting by class name is a little trickier. While still performing very well in modern browsers, it can cause some pretty significant slowdowns in IE8 and below. Why? IE9 was the first IE version to support the native document.getElementsByClassName() JavaScript method. Older browsers have to resort to using much slower DOM-scraping methods that can really impact performance.
$("[attribute=value]");
There is no native JavaScript method for this selector to use, so the only way that jQuery can perform the search is by crawling the entire DOM looking for matches. Modern browsers that support the querySelectorAll() method will perform better in certain cases (Opera, especially, runs these searches much faster than any other browser) but, generally speaking, this type of selector is Slowey McSlowersons.
$(":hidden");
Like attribute selectors, there is no native JavaScript method for this one to use. Pseudo-selectors can be painfully slow since the selector has to be run against every element in your search space. Again, modern browsers with querySelectorAll() will perform slightly better here, but try to avoid these if at all possible. If you must use one, try to limit the search space to a specific portion of the page: $("#list").find(":hidden");
But, hey, proof is in the performance testing, right? It just so happens that said proof is sitting right here. Be sure to notice the class selector numbers beside IE7 and 8 compared to other browsers and then wonder how the people on the IE team at Microsoft manage to sleep at night. Yikes.
Chaining
Almost all jQuery methods return a jQuery object. This means that when a method is run, its results are returned and you can continue executing more methods on them. Rather than writing out the same selector multiple times over, just making a selection once allows multiple actions to be run on it.
Without chaining
$("#object").addClass("active");
$("#object").css("color","#f0f");
$("#object").height(300);
With chaining
$("#object").addClass("active").css("color", "#f0f").height(300);
This has the dual effect of making your code shorter and faster. Chained methods will be slightly faster than multiple methods made on a cached selector, and both ways will be much faster than multiple methods made on non-cached selectors. Wait… “cached selector”? What is this new devilry?
Caching
Another easy way to speed up your code that seems to be a mystery to developers is the idea of caching your selectors. Think of how many times you end up writing the same selector over and over again in any project. Every $(".element") selector has to search the entire DOM each time, regardless of whether or not that selector had been previously run. Running the selection once and then storing the results in a variable means that the DOM only has to be searched once. Once the results of a selector have been cached, you can do anything with them.
First, run your search (here we’re selecting all of the <li> elements inside <ul id="blocks">):
var blocks = $("#blocks").find("li");
Now, you can use the blocks variable wherever you want without having to search the DOM every time.
$("#hideBlocks").click(function() {
blocks.fadeOut();
});
$("#showBlocks").click(function() {
blocks.fadeIn();
});
My advice? Any selector that gets run more than once should be cached. This jsperf test shows just how much faster a cached selector runs compared to a non-cached one (and even throws some chaining love in to boot).
Event delegation
Event listeners cost memory. In complex websites and apps it’s not uncommon to have a lot of event listeners floating around, and thankfully jQuery provides some really easy methods for handling event listeners efficiently through delegation.
In a bit of an extreme example, imagine a situation where a 10×10 cell table needs to have an event listener on each cell; let’s say that clicking on a cell adds or removes a class that defines the cell’s background color. A typical way that this might be written (and something I’ve often seen during code reviews) is like so:
$('table').find('td').click(function() {
$(this).toggleClass('active');
});
jQuery 1.7 has provided us with a new event listener method, .on(). It acts as a utility that wraps all of jQuery’s previous event listeners into one convenient method, and the way you write it determines how it behaves. To rewrite the above .click() example using .on(), we’d simply do the following:
$('table').find('td').on('click',function() {
$(this).toggleClass('active');
});
Simple enough, right? Sure, but the problem here is that we’re still binding one hundred event listeners to our page, one to each individual table cell. A far better way to do things is to create one event listener on the table itself that listens for events inside it. Since the majority of events bubble up the DOM tree, we can bind a single event listener to one element (in this case, the <table>) and wait for events to bubble up from its children. The way to do this using the .on() method requires only one change from our code above:
$('table').on('click','td',function() {
$(this).toggleClass('active');
});
All we’ve done is moved the td selector to an argument inside the .on() method. Providing a selector to .on() switches it into delegation mode, and the event is only fired for descendants of the bound element (table) that match the selector (td). With that one simple change, we’ve gone from having to bind one hundred event listeners to just one. You might think that the browser having to do one hundred times less work would be a good thing and you’d be completely right. The difference between the two examples above is staggering.
(Note that if your site is using a version of jQuery earlier than 1.7, you can accomplish the very same thing using the .delegate() method. The syntax of how you write the function differs slightly; if you’ve never used it before, it’s worth checking the API docs for that page to see how it works.)
DOM manipulation
jQuery makes it very easy to manipulate the DOM. It’s trivial to create new nodes, insert them, remove other ones, move things around, and so on. While the code to do this is simple to write, every time the DOM is manipulated, the browser has to repaint and reflow content which can be extremely costly. This is no more evident than in a long loop, whether it be a standard for() loop, while() loop, or jQuery $.each() loop.
In this case, let’s say we’ve just received an array full of image URLs from a database or Ajax call or wherever, and we want to put all of those images in an unordered list. Commonly, you’ll see code like this to pull this off:
var arr = [reallyLongArrayOfImageURLs];
$.each(arr, function(count, item) {
var newImg = '<li><img src="'+item+'"></li>';
$('#imgList').append(newImg);
});
There are a couple of problems with this. For one (which you should have already noticed if you’ve read the earlier part of this article), we’re making the $("#imgList") selection once for each iteration of our loop. The other problem here is that each time the loop iterates, it’s adding a new <li> to the DOM. Each of those insertions is going to be costly, and if our array is quite large then this could lead to a massive slowdown or even the dreaded ‘A script is causing this page to run slowly’ warning.
var arr = [reallyLongArrayOfImageURLs],
tmp = '';
$.each(arr, function(count, item) {
tmp += '<li><img src="'+item+'"></li>';
});
$('#imgList').append(tmp);
All we’ve done here is create a tmp variable that each <li> is added to as it’s created. Once our loop has finished iterating, that tmp variable will contain all of our list items in memory, and can be appended to our <ul> all in one go. Browsers work much faster when working with objects in memory rather than on screen, so this is a much faster, more CPU-cycle-friendly method of building a list.
Wrapping up
These are far from being the only ways to make your jQuery code run better, but they are among the simplest ones to implement. Though each individual change may only make a few milliseconds of difference, it doesn’t take long for those milliseconds to add up. Studies have shown that the human eye can discern delays of as few as 100ms, so simply making a few changes sprinkled throughout your code can very easily have a noticeable effect on how well your website or app performs. Do you have other jQuery optimization tips to share? Leave them in the comments and help make us all better.
Now go forth and make awesome! |
2011 |
Scott Kosman |
scottkosman |
2011-12-13T00:00:00+00:00 |
https://24ways.org/2011/your-jquery-now-with-less-suck/ |
code |
| 284 |
Subliminal User Experience |
The term ‘user experience’ is often used vaguely to quantify common elements of the interaction design process: wireframing, sitemapping and so on. UX undoubtedly involves all of these principles to some degree, but there really is a lot more to it than that.
Good UX is characterized by providing the user with constant feedback as they step through your interface. It means thinking about and providing fallbacks and error resolutions in even the rarest of scenarios. It’s about omitting clutter to make way for the necessary, and using the most fundamental of design tools to influence a user’s path. It means making no assumptions, designing right down to the most distinct details and going one step further every single time. In many cases, good UX is completely subliminal.
There are simple tools and subtleties we can build into our products to enhance the overall experience but, in order to do so, we really have to step beyond where we usually draw the line on what to design.
The purpose of this article is not to provide technical how-tos, as the functionality is, in most cases, quite simple and could be implemented in a myriad of ways. Rather, it will present a handful of ideas for enhancing the experience of an interface at a deeper level of design without relying on the container.
We’ll cover three elements that should get you thinking in the right mindset:
progress activity and post-active states
pseudo-class preloading
buttons and their (mis)behaviour
Progress activity and the post-active state
We’ve long established that we can’t control the devices our products are viewed on, which browser they’ll run in or what connection speed will be used to access them. We accept this all as factual, so why is it so often left to the browser to provide feedback to the user when an event is triggered or an error encountered? The browser isn’t part of the interface — it’s merely a container. A simple, visual recognition of your users’ activity may be all it takes to make or break the product.
Let’s begin with a commonly overlooked case: progress activity.
A user moves their cursor over a hyperlink or button, which is clearly defined as one by the visual language of your content. Upon doing so, they trigger the :hover state to confirm this element is indeed interactive. So far, so good. What happens next is where it starts to fall apart: the user hits this link, presumably triggering an :active state, which is then returned to the normal state upon release. And then what?
From this point on, your user is in limbo. The link has fallen back to either its regular or :visited state. You’ve effectively abandoned them and are relying entirely on the browser they’re using to communicate that something is happening. This poses quite a few problems:
The user may lose focus of what they were doing.
There is little consistency between progress indication in browsers.
The user may not even notice that their action has been acknowledged.
How many times have one or more of these events happened to you due to a lack of communication from the interface?
Think about the differences between Safari and Chrome in this area — two browsers that, when compared to each other, are relatively similar in nature, though this basic feature differs in execution.
Like all aspects of designing the user experience, there is no one true way to fix this problem, but we can introduce details that many users will unconsciously appreciate.
Consider the basic loading indicator. It’s nothing new — in fact, some would argue it’s quite a cliché. However, whether using a spinning wheel or a progress bar, a gif or JavaScript, or something more sophisticated, these simple tools create an illusion of movement, progress and activity. Depending on the implementation, progress indication graphics can significantly increase a user’s perception of the speed in which an event is taking place. Combine this with a cursor change and a lock over the element to prevent double-clicking or reloading, and your chances of keeping your user’s valuable attention have significantly increased.
Demo: Progress activity and the post-active state
This same logic applies to all aspects of defaulting in a browser, from micro-elements like this up to something as simple as a 404 page. The difference in a user’s reaction to hitting the default Apache 404 and a hand-crafted, branded page are phenomenal and there are no prizes for guessing which one they’re more likely to exit from.
Pseudo-class preloading
Another detail that it pays well to look after is the use and abuse of the :hover element and, more importantly, the content revealed by it. Chances are you’re using the :hover pseudo-class somewhere in almost every screen you create. If content is being revealed on :hover and that content takes some time to load, there will inevitably be a delay the first time it is initiated. It appears tacky and half-finished when a tooltip or drop-down loads instantly, only to have its background or supporting elements follow through a second or two later. So, let’s preload the elements we know we’ll need.
A very simple application of this would be to load each file into the default state of a visible element and offset them by a large number. This ensures our elements have loaded and are ready if and when they need to be displayed.
element {
background: url(path/to/image.jpg) -9999em -9999em no-repeat;
}
element .tooltip {
display: none;
}
element:hover .tooltip {
display: block;
background: url(path/to/image.jpg) 0 0;
}
Background images are just one example. Of course, the same logic can apply to any form of revealed content. Using a sprite graphic can also be a clever — albeit tedious — method for achieving the same goal, so if you’re using a sprite, preloading in this way may not be necessary
The differences between preloading and not can only be visualized properly with an actual demonstration.
Demo: Preloading revealed content
Buttons and their (mis)behaviour
Almost all of the time, a button serves just one purpose: to be clicked (or tapped). When a button’s pressed, therefore, if anything other than triggering the desired event occurs, a user naturally becomes frustrated. I often get funny looks when talking about this, but designing the details of a button is something I consider essential.
It goes without saying that a button should always visually recognise :hover and :active states. We can take that one step further and disable some actions that get in the way of pressing the button.
It’s rare that a user would ever want to select and use the text on a button, so let’s cleanly disable it:
element {
-moz-user-select: -moz-none;
-webkit-user-select: none;
user-select: none;
}
If the button is image-based or contains an image, we could also disable user dragging to make sure the image element stays locked to the button:
element {
-moz-user-drag: -moz-none;
-webkit-user-drag: none;
user-drag: none;
}
Demo: A more usable button
Disabling global features like this should be done with utmost caution as it’s very easy to cross the line between enhancement and friction. Cases where this is acceptable are very rare, but it’s a good trick to keep in mind nevertheless. Both Apple’s iCloud and Metalab’s Flow applications use these tools appropriately and to great extent.
You could argue that the visual feedback of having the text selected or image dragged when a user mis-hits the button is actually a positive effect, informing the user that their desired action did not work. However, covering for human error should be a designer’s job, not that of our users. We can (almost) ensure it does work for them by accommodating for errors like this in most cases.
Final thoughts
Designing to this level of detail can seem obsessive, but as a designer and user of many interfaces and applications, I believe it can be the difference between a good user experience and a great one.
The samples you’ve just seen are only a fraction of the detail we can design for. Keep in mind that the demonstrations, code and methods above outline just one way to do this. You may not agree with all of these processes or have the time and desire to consider them, but one fact remains: it’s not the technology, or the way it’s done that’s important — it’s the logic and the concept of designing everything. |
2011 |
Chris Sealey |
chrissealey |
2011-12-03T00:00:00+00:00 |
https://24ways.org/2011/subliminal-user-experience/ |
ux |
| 285 |
Composing the New Canon: Music, Harmony, Proportion |
Ohne Musik wäre das Leben ein Irrtum
—Friedrich NIETZSCHE, Götzen-Dämmerung, Sprüche und Pfeile 33, 1889
Somehow, music is hardcoded in human beings. It is something we understand and respond to without prior knowledge. Music exercises the emotions and our imaginative reflex, not just our hearing. It behaves so much like our emotions that music can seem to symbolize them, to bear them from one person to another. Not surprisingly, it conjures memories: the word music derives from Greek μουσική (mousike), art of the Muses, whose mythological mother was Mnemosyne, memory. But it can also summon up the blood, console the bereaved, inspire fanaticism, bolster governments and dissenters alike, help us learn, and make web designers dance. And what would Christmas be without music?
Music moves us, often in ways we can’t explain. By some kind of alchemy, music frees us from the elaborate nuisance and inadequacy of words. Across the world and throughout recorded history – and no doubt well before that – people have listened and made (and made out to) music.
[I]t appears probable that the progenitors of man, either the males or females or both sexes, before acquiring the power of expressing their mutual love in articulate language, endeavoured to charm each other with musical notes and rhythm.
—Charles DARWIN, The Descent of Man, and Selection in Relation to Sex, 1871
It’s so integral to humankind, we’ve sent it into space as a totem for who we are. (Who knows? It might be important.) Music is essential, a universal compulsion; as Nietzsche wrote, without music life would be a mistake.
Music, design and web design
There are some obvious and notable similarities between music and visual design. Both can convey mood and evoke emotion but, even under close scrutiny, how they do that remains to a great extent mysterious. Each has formal qualities or parts that can be abstracted, analysed and discussed, often using the same terminology: composition, harmony, rhythm, repetition, form, theme; even colour, texture and tone.
A possible reason for these shared aspects is that both visual design and music are means to connect with people in deep and lasting ways. Furthermore, I believe the connections to be made can complement direct emotional appeal. Certain aesthetic qualities in music work on an unconscious and, it could be argued, universal level. Using musical principles in our designs, then, can help provide the connectedness between content, device and user that we now seek as web designers.
Yet, when we talk about music and web design, the conversation is almost always about the music designers listen to while working, a theme finding its apotheosis in Designers.MX. Sometimes, articles in that dreary list format seek inspiration from music industry websites. There’s even a service offering pre-templated web designs for bands, and at least one book surveyed the landscape back in 2006. Occasionally, discussions broaden somewhat into whether and how different kinds of music can inspire and influence the design work we produce.
Such enquiries, it seems to me, are beside the point. Do I really design differently when I listen to Bach rather than Bacharach? Will the barely restrained energy of Count Basie’s The Kid from Red Bank mean I choose a lively colour palette, and rural, autumnal shades when inspired by Fleet Foxes? Mahler means a thirteen-column layout? Gillian Welch leads to distressed black and white photography? While reflecting the importance we place in music and how it seems to help us in our work, surveys on musical taste and lists of favourite artists fail to recognize that some of the fundamental aesthetic characteristics of music can be adapted and incorporated into modern web design.
Antiphonal geometry
Over recent years, web designers have embraced grid systems as powerful tools to help create good-looking and intuitive user experiences. With the advent of responsive design, these grids and their contents must adapt to the different screen sizes and properties of all kinds of user devices. Finding and using grid values that can scale well and retain or enhance their proportions and relationships while making the user experience meaningful in several different contexts is more important than ever.
In print, this challenge has always started with the dimensions and proportions of the page. Content can thereby be made to belong inside the page and be bound to it. And music has been used for centuries to further this aim. As Robert Bringhurst says in The Elements of Typographical Style:
Indeed, one of the simplest of all systems of page proportions is based on the familiar intervals of the diatonic scale. Pages that embody these basic musical proportions have been in common use in Europe for more than a thousand years.
Very well. But while he goes on to list (from the full chromatic scale, rather than just diatonic) the proportions and the musical intervals they’re based on, Bringhurst fails to mention what they’re ratios of or their potential effects. Shame. In his favour, however, he later touches on how proportions in print might be considered to work:
The page is a piece of paper. It is also a visible and tangible proportion, silently sounding the thoroughbass of the book. On it lies the textblock, which must answer to the page. The two together – page and textblock – produce an antiphonal geometry. That geometry alone can bond the reader to the book. Or conversely, it can put the reader to sleep, or put the reader’s nerves on edge, or drive the reader away.
So what does Bringhurst mean by antiphonal geometry, a phrase that marries the musical to the spatial? By stating that the textblock “must answer to the page”, the implication is that the relationship between the proportions of the page and the shape of the textblock printed on it embodies a spatial (geometrical) call-and-response (antiphony) that can be appealing or not.
Boulton’s new canon
But, as Mark Boulton has pointed out, on the web “there are no edges. There are no ‘pages’. We’ve made them up.” So, what is to be done? In January 2011 at the New Adventures in Web Design conference, Boulton presented his vision of a new canon of web design, a set of principles to guide us as we design the web. There are three overlapping tenets:
design from the content out
create connectedness between the different content elements
bind the content to the web device
Rather than design from the edges in, we need to design layout systems from the content out. To this end, Boulton asserts that grid system design should begin with a constraint, and he suggests we use the size of a fixed content element, such as an advertising unit or image, as a starting point for online grid calculations. Khoi Vinh advocates the same approach in his book, Ordering Disorder: Grid Principles for Web Design.
Boulton’s second and third tenets, however, are more complex and overlap significantly with each other. Connecting the different parts of the content and binding the content to the device share many characteristics and solutions:
adopting ems and percentages as units of size for layout elements
altering text size, line length and line height for different viewport dimensions
providing higher resolution images for devices with greater pixel densities
fluid layout grids, flexible images and responsive design
All can help relate the presentation of the content to its delivery in a certain context.
But how do we determine the relationship between one element of a layout and another? How can we avoid making arbitrary decisions about the relative sizes of parts of our designs? What can we use to connect the parts of our design to one another, and how can we bind the presentation of the content to the user’s device?
Tim Brown’s application of modular typographic scales hints at an answer. In the very useful tool he created for calculating such scales, Brown includes two musical ratios: the perfect fifth (2:3); and the perfect fourth (3:4). Why? Where do they come from? And what do they mean?
Harmonies musical and visual
Fundamental to music are rhythm and harmony.
As any drummer will tell you, without rhythm there is no music. Even when there’s no regular beat, any tune follows a rhythm, however irregular, simply because a change of note is a point of change in the music. Although rhythm, timing and pacing are all relevant to interaction design, right now it’s harmony we’re interested in.
Sometimes harmony is called the vertical aspect of music, and melody the horizontal. But this conceit overlooks the fact that harmony is both vertical and horizontal. A single melodic line, as it is played, implies various sets of harmonies on which it is grounded, whether or not those harmonies are played. So, harmony doesn’t just sit vertically beneath the horizontal melody, but moves horizontally as well, through harmonic progression.
To stretch this arrangement pixel-thin, we could argue that in onscreen design melody is the content, and the layout and arrangement of the content is the harmony. We sometimes say a design is harmonious when the interplay of different elements of a design is pleasing or balanced or in proportion, and the content (the melody) is set off or conveyed well by or appropriate to the design.
We seem to know instinctively whether a layout is harmonious…
In the design of The Great Discontent, the relationships between different elements combine to form a balanced whole.
…or not.
There’s no harmony in the Department for Education’s website because the different parts of the content don’t feel related to one another.
What is it that makes one design harmonious and another dissonant? It’s not just whether things line up, though that’s a start. I believe there are much deeper aesthetic forces at work, forces we can tap into in our onscreen designs. Now, I’m not going start a difficult discussion about aesthetics. For our purposes, we just need to know that it’s the branch of philosophy dealing with the nature of beauty, and the creation and perception of beauty. And among the key components in the perception of beauty are harmony and proportion. These have been part of traditional western aesthetics since Plato (about 2,500 years).
One of the ways we appreciate the beauty of music is through the harmonic intervals we hear. A musical interval is a combination of two notes and it describes the distance between the two pitches. For example, the distance between C and the G above it (if we take C as the tonic or root) is called a perfect fifth.
Left: C to G, a perfect fifth. Right: C and G, not a perfect fifth.
And, to get superficially scientific for a moment, each musical interval can be expressed as a ratio of the wavelength frequencies of the notes; for our perfect fifth, with every two wavelengths of C, there are three of G. And what is a ratio, if not a proportion of one thing to another?
So, simple musical harmony (using what’s known as just intonation1) affords us a set of proportions, expressed as ratios. Where better to apply these ideas of harmony and proportion from music in web design, than grid systems?
A digression: whither φ?
Quite often in our discussions of pure design and aesthetics, we mention the golden ratio and regurgitate the same justifications for its use: roots in antiquity; embodied in classical and Renaissance architecture and art; occurrence in nature; the New Twitter, and so forth (oh, really?).
Yet the ratios of musical intervals from just intonation are equally venerable and much more widespread: described by Pythagorus; employed in Palladian architecture, and printing, books and art from the Renaissance onwards; in modern times, film and television dimensions; standard international paper sizes (ISO 216, the A and B series); and, again and again, screen dimensions – chances are that screen you’re probably looking at right now has the proportions 2:3 (iPhone and iPod Touch), 3:4 (iPad and Kindle), 3:5 (many smartphones), 5:8 or 16:9 (many widescreen monitors), all ratios of musical intervals.
Back to our theme…
Musical interval ratios
Let’s take a look at most of the ratios within a couple of octaves and crunch some numbers to generate some percentages and other values that we can use in our designs. First, the intervals and their ratios in just intonation and expressed as ratios of one:
Name
Interval in C
Ratio
Ratio (1:x)
unison
C→C
1:1
1:1
minor second
C→D♭
15:16
1:1.067
major second
C→D
8:9
1:1.125
minor third
C→E♭
5:6
1:1.2
major third
C→E
4:5
1:1.25
perfect fourth
C→F
3:4
1:1.333
augmented fourth
or diminished fifth
C→F♯/G♭
1:√2
1:1.414
perfect fifth
C→G
2:3
1:1.5
minor sixth
C→A♭
5:8
1:1.6
major sixth
C→A
3:5
1:1.667
minor seventh
C→B♭
9:16
1:1.778
major seventh
C→B
8:15
1:1.875
octave
C→C↑
1:2
1:2
major tenth
C→E↑
2:5
1:2.5
major eleventh
C→F↑
3:8
1:2.667
major twelfth
C→G↑
1:3
1:3
double octave
C→C↑
1:4
1:4
Name
Interval in C
Ratio
Ratio (1:x)
And now as percentages, of both the larger and smaller values in the ratios:
Name
Ratio
% of larger value
% of smaller value
unison
1:1
100%
100%
minor second
15:16
93.75%
106.667%
major second
8:9
88.889%
112.5%
minor third
5:6
83.333%
120%
major third
4:5
80%
125%
perfect fourth
3:4
75%
133.333%
augmented fourth
or diminished fifth
1:√2
70.711%
141.421%
perfect fifth
2:3
66.667%
150%
minor sixth
5:8
62.5%
160%
major sixth
3:5
60%
166.667%
minor seventh
9:16
56.25%
177.778%
major seventh
8:15
53.333%
187.5%
octave
1:2
50%
200%
major tenth
2:5
40%
250%
major eleventh
3:8
37.5%
266.667%
major twelfth
1:3
33.333%
300%
double octave
1:4
25%
400%
Name
Ratio
% of larger value
% of smaller value
As you can see, the simple musical intervals are expressed as ratios of small whole numbers (integers). We can then normalize them as ratios of one, as well as derive percentage values, both in terms of the smaller value to the larger, and vice versa. These are the numbers we can incorporate into our designs. If you’ve ever written something like body { font: 100%/1.5 "Museo Sans", Helvetica, sans-serif; } in your CSS, you’re already using a musical ratio: the perfect fifth.
Modular scales allow us to generate a set of numbers based on a musical interval that can be used for all kinds of typographic and layout decisions to create harmony in a visual design for the web. As Tim Brown said at the 2010 Build conference:
I think that from that most atomic unit – type – whole experiences can resonate, whole experiences can be harmonious. And whole experiences can have a purpose suited to our design intentions.
Once more, with feeling: connectedness
As well as modular scales, there are other methods of incorporating musical interval ratios into our work. Setting the ratio of font size to line height in CSS is one such example. We could also create a typographic hierarchy using the same principle and combining several ratios that we know harmonize well musically in a chord:
body { font-size: 75%; } /* =12px = base size or tonic */
h1 { font-size: 32px; font-size: 2.667rem; }
/* =32px = 3:8 = major eleventh (C→F↑) */
h2 { font-size: 24px; font-size: 2rem; }
/* =24px = 1:2 = octave (C→C↑) */
h3 { font-size: 20px; font-size: 1.667rem; }
/* =20px = 3:5 = major sixth (C→A) */
figcaption, small { font-size: 9px; font-size : 0.75rem }
/* =9px = 3:4 = perfect fourth (C→F) */
Whoa! Hold your reindeer, Santa! How can we know what interval combinations work well together to form chords? Well, I’m a classically trained musician, so perhaps I have an advantage. To avoid a long, technically complex digression into musical harmony, here are a few basic combinations of intervals that are harmonious in one way or another:
unison; major third; perfect fifth; octave
unison; perfect fourth; major sixth; octave
unison; minor third; minor sixth; octave
unison; minor third; diminished fifth; major sixth; octave
This isn’t to say that other combinations can’t be used to interesting effect and particular purpose – they surely can – but I have to make sure there’s something left for you to experiment with in the wee small hours over the holiday. Bear in mind, though, were I to play you two notes from the same scale to form a minor second, for example, you’d probably say it was dissonant and maybe that quality of the 15:16 ratio would be translated to the design.
In the typographic hierarchy above, you’ll notice I used an interval in the higher octave, which affords a broader range of ratios while retaining the harmony. Thus, a perfect fifth (2:3) becomes a major twelfth (1:3), or a major sixth (3:5) becomes a major thirteenth (3:10).
The harmonic ratios can obviously be used as proportions for layout as well, in several different ways:
image width and height (for example, 450×800px = 9:16 = minor seventh)
main content to page width (67%:100% = 2:3 = perfect fifth)
page width to viewport width (80%:100% = 4:5 = major third)
One great benefit of using such ratios in web design work is that they can be applied in responsive web design. Proportional values, based on percentages or equivalent em units, will scale with changing viewports, so your layout and image proportions can be maintained or deliberately changed, as we’re about to find out, across devices.
Small speakers, tall speakers: binding to the device
The musical interval ratios also provide an opportunity, not only to create connectedness between the parts of a layout, but to bind the content to a device – that elusive antiphonal geometry. Just as a textblock and page resonate together, so too can web content and the screen. Earlier, I mentioned that several common screen aspect ratios match musical interval ratios. It would seem, then, that we have a set of proportions that we can use in different ways to establish and retain a sense of harmony that can be based on and change with those contexts. Using musical interval ratios, we can bind the display of our content to the device it’s displayed on.
If you haven’t met already, let me introduce you to the device-aspect-ratio property of CSS media queries.
@media only screen and (device-aspect-ratio: 3/4) { }
@media only screen and (device-aspect-ratio: 480/640) { }
@media only screen and (device-aspect-ratio: 600/800) { }
@media only screen and (device-aspect-ratio: 768/1024) { }
Regardless of the precise pixel values, each of these media queries would apply to devices whose display area has an aspect ratio of 3:4. It works by comparing the device-width with the device-height. (It’s not to be confused with aspect-ratio, which is defined by the width and height of the browser within the device.) The values in the media query are always presented as width/height, with portrait being the default orientation for smartphones and tablets; that is, to match an iPhone screen, you’d use device-aspect-ratio: 2/3, not 3/2, which won’t work.
Here’s a table of the musical intervals with their corresponding screens.
Name
device-aspect-ratio
Screens
Common resolutions (pixels)
major third
5/4
TFT LCD computer screens
1,280×1,024
perfect fourth
3/4 or 4/3
iPad, Kindle and other tablets, PDAs
320×240, 768×1,024
perfect fifth
2/3
iPhone, iPod Touch
320×480, 640×960
minor sixth
8/5 (16/10)
Many widescreens
1,152×720, 1,440×900, 1,920×1,200
major sixth
3/5
Many smartphones
240×400, 480×800
minor seventh
16/9 or 9/16
Many widescreens and some smartphones
720×1,280, 1,366×768, 1,920×1,080, 2,560×1,440
[You might argue that I’m playing fast and loose with the ratios. I suppose, mathematically speaking, 9:16 is not the same as 16:9: I’m no expert. But let’s not throw the baby out with the bath water, particularly at Christmas.]
With this in mind, we can begin to write media queries that will influence various typographic and layout values in line with the aspect ratios of specific screens and in combination with em-based min-width queries that work from smaller, mobile screens to larger, desktop screens.
Here’s a very simple demo page with only some text, an image with a caption and a little basic layout: no seasonal overindulgence here.
Demo: Sample page using device-aspect-ratio media queries based on musical interval ratios
Our initial styles for all devices are based on the perfect fifth, with the major third and octave rounding things out into a harmonious whole, whether or not media queries are supported. For example:
html { font-size: 100%; line-height: 1.5; }
/* font-size:line-height = 16:24 = 2:3 = perfect fifth */
h1 { font-size: 32px; font-size: 2rem; line-height: 1.25; }
/* font-size:line-height = 32:40 = 4:5 = major third
body:h1 = 16:32 = 1:2 = octave */
While we should really consider methods of delivering images appropriate to the screen size, let’s just stick to a single image for all devices. But why don’t we change its aspect ratio from 4:3 to 3:2, to fit with our harmonic scheme? It’s easy enough to do with overflow:hidden on the <figure> element to hide a part of the image, and a negative margin fudge:
figure img { margin: -8.5% 0 0 0; width: 100%; max-width: 100%; }
Our first break point targets devices 320 pixels wide with an aspect ratio of 2:3, namely the iPhone and iPod Touch:
/* 320px = 20×16 */
@media only screen and (min-width: 20em) and (device-aspect-ratio: 2/3) { }
We’re actually already there, of course, as the intervals we’ve chosen resonate with this aspect ratio – the content is already bound to the device.
Our next media query, then, will make some changes to match a different ratio, the major sixth (3:5), which is same as that of many smartphones:
/* 480px = 30×16 */
@media only screen and (min-width: 30em) and (device-aspect-ratio: 3/5) { }
A different aspect ratio might require a change in harmony. For devices with these proportions, we’ll now use the perfect fourth (3:4) and the major sixth (3:5) along with the octave we already have to create a new resonating harmony. For instance, a slightly wider screen means we can increase the line-height to aid the legibility of longer lines:
html { line-height: 1.667; }
/* font-size:line-height = 16:26.672 = 3:5 = major sixth */
h1 { font-size: 32px; font-size: 2rem; line-height: 1.667; }
/* font-size:line-height = 32:53.333 = 3:5 = major sixth
body:h1 = 16:32 = 1:2 = octave */
and we can remove the negative margin to display our 4:3 image in its entirety.
Each screen displays content styled using relationships related to its own proportions. On the left, an iPhone 4 (2:3); on the right, a Samsung Nexus S (3:5). Your mileage may vary.
Another device, another media query. At 768 pixels, screens are wide enough to add columns. The ratios we’ve used for the 3:5 screens include the perfect fourth (3:4) so we don’t need to change any of the font measurements, but we can base the proportions of the columns on the major sixth interval:
article { float: left; width: 56%; }
/* width of main column 3:5 (60% of 100%, major sixth)
incorporating gutter width */
aside { float : right; width : 36%; }
On devices with a 3:4 aspect ratio, this works even better in landscape orientation.
While not every screen over 768 pixels wide will have 3:4 proportions, the range of intervals informing the design ensure harmonious relationships between the different parts of the layout.
For wide screens proper (break point at 1,280 pixels) we can employ a new set of harmonious intervals. Many laptop and desktop screens have a 16:10 aspect ratio, which boils down to 8:5, equivalent to the minor sixth (5:8). Combined with a minor third (5:6) and the octave (1:2), this creates a new harmony appropriate to these devices. Let’s increase the font size and change the image’s aspect ratio to match:
html { font-size: 120%; line-height: 1.6; }
/* font-size increased for wider screens from 16px to 19.2px
(5:6 = minor third)
font-size:line-height = 19.2:30.72 = 5:8 = minor sixth */
figure img { margin: -12.5% 0 0 ; }
/* using -ve margin combined with overflow:hidden
on the figure element
to crop the image from 4:3 to 8:5 = minor sixth */
A wide screen with a 8:5 (16:10) aspect ratio and an image to match.
With more pixels at our disposal, we can also now use the musical interval ratios to determine the width of the layout, and change the column proportions as well:
section { margin: 0 auto; width: 83.333%; }
/* content width:screen width = 5:6 = minor third */
article { width: 60%; }
/* width of main column 5:8 (62.5% of 100%, minor sixth)
incorporating gutter width */
aside { width: 35%; }
With some carefully targeted media queries, we can begin to reach towards fulfilling the second and third tenets of Boulton’s new canon for web design: connecting the parts of content through relationships embodied in the layout design; and binding the content to the devices people use to access it.
Coda
Musical interval ratios and screen aspect ratios reveal more than convenient correspondence. These proportions work on a deep aesthetic level. Much is claimed for the golden ratio φ, but none of the screens pervading our lives use it. Perhaps that’s an accident of technology, but can making screens to φ’s proportions be more difficult or expensive than 2:3 or 3:4 or 16:10? Here, then, is not just one but a set of proportions with a uniquely human focus, originating in nature, recognized in antiquity, fundamental still.
We find music to be an art steeped with meaning, yet, unlike literary and representational arts, purely instrumental music has no obvious semantic content. It boasts an ability to express emotions while remaining an abstract art in some sense, which makes it very like design. These days, we’re rightly encouraged to design for emotion, to make our users’ experience meaningful, seductive, delightful. Using musical ideas and principles in our designs can help achieve those ends.
Let’s not be naïve, of course; designing web pages is even less like composing music than it’s like designing for print. In visual design, the eye will always be sovereign to the ear; following these principles will only get us so far. We cannot truly claim that a carefully composed web page layout will have the same qualities and effect as any musical patterns that inform it. In music, a set of intervals is always harmonious in relation to other sets of intervals: music rarely stands still. What aspect ratios will future screens take? Already today there is great variation in devices and support for media queries (and within that, support for device-aspect-ratio). And what of non-western musical traditions? Or rhythm, form, tempo and dynamics? What I’ve demonstrated above is only a suggestion, a tentative exploration of one possible way forward.
But as our discipline matures and we become more articulate about what we do, we must look longer and deeper into areas of human endeavour already rich with value. Music is a fertile ground to explore and has the potential to yield up new approaches for web design.
Footnotes
Just intonation is a system of tuning that uses small integers to describe the musical intervals, based initially on the perfect fifth, that most consonant of intervals. Simple instruments such as vibrating strings and natural horns, as well as unaccompanied voices, tend to fall into just intonation naturally. |
2011 |
Owen Gregory |
owengregory |
2011-12-09T00:00:00+00:00 |
https://24ways.org/2011/composing-the-new-canon/ |
design |
| 287 |
Extracting the Content |
As we throw away our canvas in approaches and yearn for a content-out process, there remains a pain point: the Content. It is spoken of in the hushed tones usually reserved for Lord Voldemort. The-thing-that-someone-else-is-responsible-for-that-must-not-be-named.
Designers and developers have been burned before by not knowing what the Content is, how long it is, what style it is and when the hell it’s actually going to be delivered, in internet eons past. Warily, they ask clients for it. But clients don’t know what to make, or what is good, because no one taught them this in business school. Designers struggle to describe what they need and when, so the conversation gets put off until it’s almost too late, and then everyone is relieved that they can take the cop-out of putting up a blog and maybe some product descriptions from the brochure.
The Content in content out.
I’m guessing, as a smart, sophisticated, and, may I say, nicely-scented reader of the honourable and venerable tradition of 24 ways, that you sense something better is out there. Bunches of boxes to fill in just don’t cut it any more in a responsive web design world. The first question is, how are you going to design something to ensure users have the easiest access to the best Content, if you haven’t defined at the beginning what that Content is? Of course, it’s more than possible that your clients have done lots of user research before approaching you to start this project, and have a plethora of finely tuned Content for you to design with.
Have you finished laughing yet? Alright then. Let’s just assume that, for whatever reason of gross oversight, this hasn’t happened. What next?
Bringing up Content for the first time with a client is like discussing contraception when you’re in a new relationship. It might be awkward and either party would probably rather be doing something else, but it needs to be broached before any action happens (that, and it’s disastrous to assume the other party has the matter in hand). If we can’t talk about it, how can we expect people to be doing it right and not making stupid mistakes? That being the case, how do we talk about Content? Let’s start by finding a way to talk about it without blushing and scuffing our shoes. And there’s a reason I’ve been treating Content as a Proper Noun.
The first step, and I mean really-first-step-way-back-at-the-beginning-of-the-project-while-you-are-still-scoping-out-what-the-hell-you-might-do-for-each-other-and-it’s-still-all-a-bit-awkward-like-a-first-date, is for you to explain to the client how important it is that you, together, work out what is important to your users as part of the user experience design, so that your users get the best user experience. The trouble is that, in most cases, this would lead to blank stares, possibly followed by a light cough and a query about using Comic Sans because it seems friendly.
Let’s start by ensuring your clients understand the task ahead. You see, all the time we talk about the Content we do our clients a big disservice. Content is poorly defined. It looms over a project completion point like an unscalable (in the sense of a dozen stacked Kilimanjaros), seething, massive, singular entity. The Content.
Defining the problem.
We should really be thinking of the Content as ‘contents’; as many parts that come together to form a mighty experience, like hit 90s kids’ TV show Mighty Morphin Power Rangers*.
*For those of you who might have missed the Power Rangers, they were five teenagers with attitude, each given crazy mad individual skillz and a coloured lycra suit from an alien overlord. In return, they had to fight a new monster of the week using their abilities and weaponry in sync (even if the audio was not) and then, finally, in thrilling combination as a Humongous Mechanoid Machine of Awesome. They literally joined their individual selves, accessories and vehicles into a big robot. It was a toy manufacturer’s wet dream.
So, why do I say Content is like the Power Rangers? Because Content is not just a humongous mecha. It is a combination of well-crafted pieces of contents that come together to form a well-crafted humongous mecha. Of Content.
The Red Power Ranger was always the leader. You can imagine your text contents, found on about pages, product descriptions, blog articles, and so on, as being your Red Power Ranger.
Maybe your pictures are your Yellow Power Ranger; video is Blue (not used as much as the others, but really impressive when given a good storyline); maybe Pink is your infographics (it’s wrong to find it sexier than the other equally important Rangers, but you kind of do anyway). And so on.
These bits of content – Red Text Ranger, Yellow Picture Ranger and others – often join together on a page, like they are teaming up to fight the bad guy in an action scene, and when they all come together (your standard workaday huge mecha) in a launched site, that’s when Content becomes an entity.
While you might have a vision for the whole site, Content rarely works that way. Of course, you keep your eye on the bigger prize, the completion of your mega robot, but to get there you need to assemble your working parts, the cogs and springs of contents that will mesh together to finally create your Humongous Mecha of Content. You create parts and join them to form a whole. (It’s rarely seamless; often we need to adjust as we go, but we can create our Mecha’s blueprint by making sure we have all the requisite parts.)
The point here is the order these parts were created. No alien overlord plans a Humongous Mechanoid and then thinks, “Gee, how can I split this into smaller fighting units powered by teenagers in snazzy shiny suits?” No toy manufacturer goes into production of a mega robot, made up of model mecha vehicles with detachable arsenal, without thinking how they will easily fit back together to form the ‘Buy all five now to create the mega robot’ set. No good contents are created as a singular entity and chunked up to be slotted in to place any which way, into the body of a site.
Think contents, not the Content. Think of contents as smaller units, or as a plural. The Content is what you have at the end. The contents are what you are creating and they are easy to break down. You are no longer scaling the unscalable. You can draw the map and plot the path, page by page, section by section.
The page table is your friend
To do this, I use a page table. A page table is a simple table template you can create in the word processor of your choice, that you use to tell you everything about the contents of a page – everything except the contents itself.
Here’s a page table I created for an employee’s guide to redundancy in the alpha.gov.uk website:
Guide to redundancy for employees
Page objective: Provide specific information for employees who are facing redundancy about the process, their options and next steps.
Source content: directgov page on Redundancy.
Scope: In scope
Page title
An employee’s guide to redundancy
Priority content
Message: You have rights as an employee facing redundancy
Method: A guide written in plain English, with links to appropriate additional content.
A video guide (out of scope).
Covers the stages of redundancy and rights for those in trade unions and not in trade unions. Glossary of unfamiliar terms.
Call to action: Read full guide, act to explore redundancy actions, benefits or new employment.
Assets: link to redundancy calculator.
Secondary
Related items, or popular additional links.
Additional tools, such as search and suggestions.
location set v not set states
microcopy encouraging location set where location may make a difference to the content – ie, Scotland/Northern Ireland.
Tertiary
Footer and standard links.
Content creation: Content exists but was created within the constraints of the previous CMS. Review, correct and edit where necessary.
Maintenance: should be flagged for review upon advice from Department of Work and Pensions, and annually.
Technology/Publishing/Policy implications: Should be reviewed once the glossary styles have been decided. No video guide in scope at this time, so languages should be simple and screen reader friendly.
Reliance on third parties: None, all content and source exists in house.
Outstanding questions: None.
Download a copy of this page table
This particular page table template owes a lot to Brain Traffic’s version found in Kristina Halvorson’s book Content Strategy for the Web. With smaller clients than, say, the government, I might use something a bit more casual. With clients who like timescales and deadlines, I might turn it into a covering sheet, with signatures and agreements from two departments who have to work together to get the piece done on time.
I use page tables, and the process of working through them, to reassure clients that I understand the task they face and that I can help them break it down section by section, page stack to page, down to product descriptions and interaction copy. About 80% of my clients break into relieved smiles. Most clients want to work with you to produce something good, they just don’t understand how, and they want you to show them the mountain path on the map. With page tables, clients can understand that with baby steps they can break down their content requirements and commission content they need in time for the designers to work with it (as opposed to around it). If I was Santa, these clients would be on my nice list for sure.
My own special brand of Voldemort-content-evilness comes in how I wield my page tables for the other 20%. Page tables are not always thrilling, I’ll admit. Sometimes they get ignored in favour of other things, yet they are crucial to the continual growth and maintenance of a truly content-led site. For these naughty list clients who, even when given the gift of the page table, continually say “Ooh, yes. Content. Right”, I have a special gift. I have a stack of recycled paper under my desk and a cheap black and white laser printer. And I print a blank page table for every conceivable page I can find on the planned redesign. If I’m feeling extra nice, I hole punch them and put them in a fat binder.
There is nothing like saying, “This is all the contents you need to have in hand for launch”, and the satisfying thud the binder makes as it hits the table top, to galvanize even the naughtiest clients to start working with you to create the content you need to really create in a content-out way. |
2011 |
Relly Annett-Baker |
rellyannettbaker |
2011-12-15T00:00:00+00:00 |
https://24ways.org/2011/extracting-the-content/ |
content |
| 288 |
Displaying Icons with Fonts and Data- Attributes |
Traditionally, bitmap formats such as PNG have been the standard way of delivering iconography on websites. They’re quick and easy, and it also ensures they’re as pixel crisp as possible. Bitmaps have two drawbacks, however: multiple HTTP requests, affecting the page’s loading performance; and a lack of scalability, noticeable when the page is zoomed or viewed on a screen with a high pixel density, such as the iPhone 4 and 4S.
The requests problem is normally solved by using CSS sprites, combining the icon set into one (physically) large image file and showing the relevant portion via background-position. While this works well, it can get a bit fiddly to specify all the positions. In particular, scalability is still an issue. A vector-based format such as SVG sounds ideal to solve this, but browser support is still patchy.
The rise and adoption of web fonts have given us another alternative. By their very nature, they’re not only scalable, but resolution-independent too. No need to specify higher resolution graphics for high resolution screens!
That’s not all though:
Browser support: Unlike a lot of new shiny techniques, they have been supported by Internet Explorer since version 4, and, of course, by all modern browsers. We do need several different formats, however!
Design on the fly: The font contains the basic graphic, which can then be coloured easily with CSS – changing colours for themes or :hover and :focus styles is done with one line of CSS, rather than requiring a new graphic. You can also use CSS3 properties such as text-shadow to add further effects. Using -webkit-background-clip: text;, it’s possible to use gradient and inset shadow effects, although this creates a bitmap mask which spoils the scalability.
Small file size: specially designed icon fonts, such as Drew Wilson’s Pictos font, can be as little as 12Kb for the .woff font. This is because they contain fewer characters than a fully fledged font. You can see Pictos being used in the wild on sites like Garrett Murray’s Maniacal Rage.
As with all formats though, it’s not without its disadvantages:
Icons can only be rendered in monochrome or with a gradient fill in browsers that are capable of rendering CSS3 gradients. Specific parts of the icon can’t be a different colour.
It’s only appropriate when there is an accompanying text to provide meaning. This can be alleviated by wrapping the text label in a tag (I like to use <b> rather than <span>, due to the fact that it’s smaller and isn’ t being used elsewhere) and then hiding it from view with text-indent:-999em.
Creating an icon font can be a complex and time-consuming process. While font editors can carry out hinting automatically, the best results are achieved manually.
Unless you’re adept at creating your own fonts, you’re restricted to what is available in the font. However, fonts like Pictos will cover the most common needs, and icons are most effective when they’re using familiar conventions.
The main complaint about using fonts for icons is that it can mean adding a meaningless character to our markup. The good news is that we can overcome this by using one of two methods – CSS generated content or the data-icon attribute – in combination with the :before and :after pseudo-selectors, to keep our markup minimal and meaningful.
Our simple markup looks like this:
<a href="/basket" class="icon basket">View Basket</a>
Note the multiple class attributes. Next, we’ll import the Pictos font using the @font-face web fonts property in CSS:
@font-face {
font-family: 'Pictos';
src: url('pictos-web.eot');
src: local('☺'),
url('pictos-web.woff') format('woff'),
url('pictos-web.ttf') format('truetype'),
url('pictos-web.svg#webfontIyfZbseF') format('svg');
}
This rather complicated looking set of rules is (at the time of writing) the most bulletproof way of ensuring as many browsers as possible load the font we want. We’ll now use the content property applied to the :before pseudo-class selector to generate our icon. Once again, we’ll use those multiple class attribute values to set common icon styles, then specific styles for .basket. This helps us avoid repeating styles:
.icon {
font-family: 'Pictos';
font-size: 22px:
}
.basket:before {
content: "$";
}
What does the :before pseudo-class do? It generates the dollar character in a browser, even when it’s not present in the markup. Using the generated content approach means our markup stays simple, but we’ll need a new line of CSS, defining what letter to apply to each class attribute for every icon we add.
data-icon is a new alternative approach that uses the HTML5 data- attribute in combination with CSS attribute selectors. This new attribute lets us add our own metadata to elements, as long as its prefixed by data- and doesn’t contain any uppercase letters. In this case, we want to use it to provide the letter value for the icon. Look closely at this markup and you’ll see the data-icon attribute.
<a href="/basket" class="icon" data-icon="$">View Basket</a>
We could add others, in fact as many as we like.
<a href="/" class="icon" data-icon="k">Favourites</a>
<a href="/" class="icon" data-icon="t">History</a>
<a href="/" class="icon" data-icon="@">Location</a>
Then, we need just one CSS attribute selector to style all our icons in one go:
.icon:before {
content: attr(data-icon);
/* Insert your fancy colours here */
}
By placing our custom attribute data-icon in the selector in this way, we can enable CSS to read the value of that attribute and display it before the element (in this case, the anchor tag). It saves writing a lot of CSS rules. I can imagine that some may not like the extra attribute, but it does keep it out of the actual content – generated or not.
This could be used for all manner of tasks, including a media player and large simple illustrations. See the demo for live examples. Go ahead and zoom the page, and the icons will be crisp, with the exception of the examples that use -webkit-background-clip: text as mentioned earlier.
Finally, it’s worth pointing out that with both generated content and the data-icon method, the letter will be announced to people using screen readers. For example, with the shopping basket icon above, the reader will say “dollar sign view basket”. As accessibility issues go, it’s not exactly the worst, but could be confusing. You would need to decide whether this method is appropriate for the audience. Despite the disadvantages, icon fonts have huge potential. |
2011 |
Jon Hicks |
jonhicks |
2011-12-12T00:00:00+00:00 |
https://24ways.org/2011/displaying-icons-with-fonts-and-data-attributes/ |
code |