24ways.org: A Sacred Cow?
OK as I’ve been drawn slightly into the conversation about this year’s redesign of 24ways.org and the innovative approach to it’s interface I have to concede in principle I agree with Veerle’s post – we need not throw unfair criticism at those who test the edges of the box. But on the flip side of that, if we test the edges and they appear lacking then shouldn’t we at least acknowledge the design issue? Sacred cows aside let’s talk frankly. Light grey on grey text? It is hard to read… no? Do WCAG and visual contrast ring any bells with anyone? Sacred cow or not the same site produced by someone of less stature would be caned regardless of the attempt at innovation. Are we back to undesign – bad is the new good?
No I’m not going to get into a huge conversation about the overall accessibility or usability (or not) of 24ways.org. Someone else will do that much better. But when the contrast reading issue is responded to with these lines, by an industry leader, then it’s a concern.
If the visual design isn’t to your tastes, the RSS feed offers full content with no design (and always has)Drew McLellan
Could I ask the question in this way. Did Target have an RSS feed? Are we being told here that contrary to industry best practices, as I understand them, that as long as an RSS feed exists then we need not make our content readable? Is Drew really telling us that WCAG is easily circumvented for the visually impaired by the inclusion of RSS on our websites? For that matter, I could PRINT it so that’s not the point. I could even ask someone else to read it for me – there’s an idea.
Similarly in Veerle’s comments she fobbed off references to Steve Krug’s Don’t Make Me Think.
Here’s my 2 cents and then I’ll shut up. Point blank. While I have nothing against 24ways.org it was bound to collect a certain amount of criticism – we are not always going to pat people on the back and say wonderful things about everything you touch in the demi-god obeisance of our underlingness. If you don’t want to be criticised for grey on grey illegible text then provide sufficient contrast. Don’t say my eyes are wrong or that my RSS feed will fix it. Target could have saved a fortune on that defence, I’m unconvinced. The blunt of this conversation is that 24ways.org is a sacred cow. We shouldn’t criticise it. We should emulate 24ways.org from hereafter with mystery meat navigation and experimental design. Yes, that’s brilliant. Excellent. And I was concerned because my server somehow borks my site in Lynx! Awesome. It’s a good case that technically excellent may not be accessible or particularly usable web design.
In the big picture I don’t care really. But the trail that led to this post was a response to an article that Veerle wrote on which I commented and posted an article of my own. This post is the result of a comment left by Drew overnight which took a little offence at my not liking the current design. Now consider this… had Veerle not posted an outrage at the criticism would these two recent posts here even exist? No. This would be something entirely NOT about 24ways.org. Is that a good thing or a bad thing?
OK as a marketer sit down and take off your designer’s hurt feelings. The truely effective virals are loved AND hated. That’s a good thing, no? Don’t be so wounded. It’s working. No I don’t like the 24ways.org redesign. What does my opinion count? Or anyones? Thus the business case post from yesterday…
And I’m quite sure that as an industry leading light it will inspire a plethora of hard to read mystery meat knock-off emulations and innovations of it’s own. Probably even in government! Now there’s a revolution.
Everybody be nice and agree to disagree without hurt feelings. OK?
December 10th, 2008 at 11:50 am
I’m not sure why you thought I was offended. The unfair criticism I was responding to is that we were purposefully trying to make your life hard. I’m not sure why you’d think we’d care to do that.
Feel free to criticise. There’s no sacred cow. This is a just a site I set up with some friends to give a bit back to the web dev community over advent. There’s no business cases or marketeers, because there’s no business. It’s just a small volunteer project. We welcome feedback, and each article has comments enabled as it goes live for reader input.
However, there’s a fine line between offering criticism and just shit-stirring, and I believe this post crosses that line.
December 10th, 2008 at 12:54 pm
Hi Drew, you are free to believe what you may. No I don’t consider this post shit stirring, in fact the opposite. I think there are valid points considering you are a perceived industry leader? Could you relate how light grey on grey text is industry best practice (regardless of the RSS feed, my ability to print, or a friend to read the content to me)? If you weren’t an industry somebody your opinion and work would not be on the radar at all right now…
And I think there are valid points about the up side and down side to viral web conversations, by the way. We are marketers in this business whether we like it or not. One can’t have the up side of it and not accept validity to the down side.
But, if you read the post, you’ll see it says let’s agree to disagree. If your business case is met and your stats support it then what does it matter WCAG gets a pummelling on contrast. No? I think that commentary is quite valid. But such is life, only 4 people come here anyway including the horse. What should it matter what I really think in a blogosphere full of noise?
Or, in other words, if Veerle can have her rant about innovation and 24ways.org then I can have mine… had she not ranted nor would I. If that makes sense.
December 15th, 2008 at 5:34 pm
I’m not feeling the Christmas love at 24ways.org…
I get that the “Woo, let’s all pile on 24ways.org” thing is well over a week old, but it’s only just now that I’ve sat down and thought about what it is precisely that gets up my nose about the……