Lilula

Coming soon.

Browser Resolution Forecasting

19March2008

Recently I’ve been viewing more and more websites which no longer cater to 800 x 600 users. Quite rightly since the amount of people using that resolution has considerably diminished. That would be an appropriate view on the subject considering today’s technology - you can get big monitors relatively cheaply. So what does tomorrow bring?

There is a high demand for tiny digital devices with internet browsing capabilities. The iPhone has an intuitive way of browsing by reacting to pinching and poking in order to navigate a web page. For the most part devices don’t have that level of complexity and simply render the website the best way they can. Those devices tend to be the most affordable.

Recently I purchased an Asus EEE PC,  and the resolution on that is a mere 800 pixels in width. The newer version has a larger resolution however it’s safe to assume that smaller devices such as tablet PC’s probably will maintain these obscurely small resolutions until it is cheaper to develop highly adaptive software such as the browser on the iPhone.

As with most desirable gadgets, within the next few years ultra mobile devices are going to drop in price and become a commodity for the general public. They already populate the technology market as some of the hottest merchandise. As such we may very well be seeing a come back in smaller resolutions.

Who knows - maybe fluid layouts will become a conventional fashion staple! :)

Comments are off

You’ve Been Robbed

02March2008

As you sit here looking blankly at the screen, scratching your ear in the hopes that dislodging that rather large piece of earwax will increase the capabilities of your auditory perceptions and never contemplating the fact that one day you will die and your life will have been wasted spending one too many brain dead hours in front of a luminous screen - where was I? - as you sit here looking blankly at the screen you are being robbed of your creativity.

One might argue how can that be possible with the amount of creative galleries we have, the countless people who have beautiful and perfect websites. We now have standards, accessibility to consider, web 2.0 coming out of every orifice and lovely brain dead self-proclaimed creative folk to harp on about it. How very quaint.

At the risk of sounding pretentious I love going to museums and art galleries because those places offer me something which I can make a visual connection with - something to challenge my perceptions and my intellect. The internet is not so different - this particular designer believes it’s a postmodern wonderland with dynamite potential. So why have we suddenly halted when it comes to creative endeavour online?

It seems that the rules in motion do not believe in websites that behave as a challenge to the user whether that be through distorting conventions of spatial awareness within digital spaces or redefining aesthetics in a way that doesn’t have to be confined to a digital screen.

So does that mean if a link ain’t blue with an underline, then it isn’t a link? Hypertrails can’t be sporadic intellectual journey’s - they have to be so simple so that even an earthworm with Down’s can navigate from one page to another. Great, exactly the demographic I’m sure thousands are striving for. Very good and well for bloggers (whom which sit on the most inane end of internet usage - come on guys we can’t deny it, we’re a waste of web space) but it breaks my heart when I see websites dedicated to design and art regurgitating the same shit over and over.

Quite frankly I grow weary of others defending my rights as an astigmatic, extremely long-sighted person because I’m also intelligent, resourceful and capable of navigating the internet without additional assistance - I think I should also mention I feel incredibly patronised when my ability to surf the web comes into questioning simply over the matter of my eyesight being far below normal standards. Putting standards in place to make the internet easier is simply robbing it of its potential.

Not to say that all aspects of the internet should not be accessible for all, but why can’t some of it be exclusive in the same way that art can be exclusive to those with different perceptions? That’s the sort of thinking that allows the internet to advance rather than to stagnate like Jakob Nielson would have it. I also believe that good design is born from a marriage of creativity within limitations - however what limitations are there in an environment that is seemingly boundless?

Comments are off

CSS Image Rollovers

26February2008

I know there’s a billion tutorials on how to do these, but I’m going to show you the easy way when it comes to block navigation (vertical and horizontal). No moveable backgrounds that cock up in caching browsers. No JavaScript - I’m looking at you Dreamweaver - and it’s simple, fast, valid and cross-browser compatible. All that and a bag of chips.

I’m new to tutorial writing, so bear with me. You will need to know basic HTML and CSS. If you feel lost refer to W3 Schools or post a comment here. I’m going to use a horizontal column such as the one utilised in my current layout as an example. We’ll start with an image of what it’s going to look like first:

Sample Menu

Holy crap, it’s beautiful. Now let’s create a solid image of the rollover effect:

Rollover Sample

I’m using a subtle effect because I want my rollovers to move with the same stealth as ninja’s. Also it’s less confusing for the visitor and creates a more consistent and navigable interface whilst incorporating a moderate level of interactivity.

Now we have those two images, slice up the first one - namely what your navigation will look whilst it’s stationary. Leave the hover image intact since for block navigation you won’t need to mutilate the hover image into tiny pieces. Using my example, we should now have five sliced images for each piece of text and one block image of the hover effect. Time for a little bit of trickery.

Firstly let’s create our navigation in HTML using lists:

<ul id="navigation">
<li class="home"><a href="home.php" title="Home"><span class="hide">Home</span> </a></li>
<li class="about"><a href="about.php" title="About"><span class="hide">About</span> </a></li>
<li class="righto"><a href="righto.php" title="Righto!"><span class="hide">Righto!</span> </a></li>
<li class="tea"><a href="tea.php" title="Tea"><span class="hide">Tea</span> </a></li>
<li class="weather"><a href="weather.php" title="Weather"><span class="hide">Weather</span> </a></li>
</ul>

That was so easy I fell asleep and concussed myself on the keyboard. Notice there’s a space after the spanned text - you will be needing this so don’t forget it. Now we’ve got our navigation set in HTML, it’s time to move onto the CSS. We’ll call each image something logical and the hover block ‘hover.gif’:

#navigation {background:url('hover.gif') no-repeat; width:150px; height:200px;}
#navigation li {display:inline; list-style:none;}
#navigation li, #navigation {padding:0px; margin:0px;}
.home a {background:url('home.gif'); height:43px;}
.about a {background:url('about.gif'); height:38px;}
.righto a{background:url('righto.gif'); height:35px;}
.tea a {background:url('tea.gif'); height:38px;}
.weather a {background:url('weather.gif'); height:46px;}
#navigation a {display:block; width:150px;}
#navigation a:hover {background:none;}
.hide {display:none;}

Fin! If you’re feeling particularly fancy you can have ‘clickable’ rollovers using the :active pseudo-class. For vertical rollovers change the width on the navigation but keep a consistent height. To move the navigation around within a space, place it within a div. There are plenty of unexplored possibilities.

I’m paranoid about coupling an internal style sheet with my external one so I can’t actually show you how this particular sample rollover looks here on my blog - such is life. However you can download a working sample in case the above made no sense.

If you make a rollover using this tutorial it would give me great pleasure to see it. Show some love and either contact or link me - who knows maybe I’ll link you right back in this tutorial.

Happy rollovering fellow netizens!

Comments are off

Web’s Dumbest Trend

06January2008

Before I start I have to quote Madame Mysterioso’s weekly blogoscope for Virgo: “Your hatred towards your own website is unhealthy. If you’re so unhappy with it, why not take a break?” I laughed out loud for a long time, mainly because it’s true. However I am compulsive and needy and as such will not involve myself in any break taking whatsoever. I am sticking around so that all of you may relish in my misery guts. On to the blog subject!

There is the one thing that really irks me about websites above everything else. Most things about the internet and the people on it annoy me to varying degrees. Bad spelling, attention whores, poor standards in blogging, Rachael and her atrociously overpowering sex appeal, site title oxymoron’s, rude behaviour, lack of social skills and George Clooney. I don’t know if George Clooney has a blog, but I’m willing to bet that he would love nothing more than to inflate his hideous ego with one.

I’ll dive straight in. Sometimes there is a quick summary in a blog’s sidebar of the authors interests provided in a list usually preceded by ‘Loves:’ or something similar. Fair enough, some people might read blogs based on common interest. So why is it that sometimes this is then followed by pet hates?

Usually these hates are along the lines of liars, cheaters and thieves. Pray tell, why are these painfully obvious universal dislikes listed? Are they there as a deterrent? Are liars, cheaters and thieves meant to look on in dismay as they realise that they are not welcome? Or maybe they are listed to rest unspoken concerns that the author may have a secret unhealthy obsession with liars, cheaters and thieves.

I personally think that liars, cheaters and thieves need a break from all this hatin’z. Lest we forget that lying, cheating and thieving are the three main recurring traits of Johnny Depp’s Captain Jack Sparrow, most of Daniel Craig’s characters, Sinbad the sailor and pretty much any other sexy male character in cinema or literature.

If I had to make a hate list it’d probably be this addition to the list I made above: The ending of the Golden Compass film adaptation of Northern Lights, wet socks, my crazy cat woman hair, the fact that I’ve finished playing Twilight Princess, George Clooney, use of the word ‘cookie’ as slang in reference to female genitalia and children.

And thanks to that indiscretion I now hate myself for making a hate list. I don’t want to feel like the only one delving in hypocrisy here so feel free to comment with your own hate lists should you feel disgusted enough to.

Comments are off

Behave!

03December2007

Please bear with me whilst I go all Sherry Turkle on your asses. It’s to be expected I suppose, I am a great enthusiast of online identity and post modernism. I also like piña colada’s and getting caught in the rain. I don’t like yoga. I digress from my original point.

The other day I was coming up with essay titles for one of my units at university, and the one that interested me most was ‘how are we expected to behave online’? Long gone are the early days of the internet where hippies sat around toking and claiming how the internet was freedom, peace and love. We all very well know that there are as many social expectations online as there are offline even if we aren’t confined to a single identity.

Within the blogging community I somewhat consider myself a part of I’d say a few people would expect me to have a sensible design with somewhat intelligent or original content - despite the fact that I am a blogging vegetable. Were I to use 8PT text and post about how Chad looked at me in the mall then I’d fall into a completely different circle. I’m not expressing a preference because I’ve never cared about being within particular social circles but stay with me, there is a method in my madness.

How do people fall within different cliques on the internet and what do they do to maintain that status? I don’t just mean within the blogging community either, since bloggers are just a percentage of internet users online. There are also online communities which demand a higher level of involvement, and IRC which can be just as fast paced or even quicker than having a conversation offline.

This would lead to suggest that should any one individual sit inside more than one social circle online then they will behave very differently in each one. I appreciate that this can sometimes be the same in real life, but to what extent? I admit to behaving slightly differently towards different people and different social groups in real life, however I don’t think I vary from person to person as dramatically as one can online.

For example, the same person can be part of a sweet bubbly community such as the Quilting Bee and at the same time be a compulsive gambler on a bingo website. Or maybe they’re taking the piss out of someone online via a review, and emailing their grandparents a friendly e-card. Thanks to tabbed navigation these things can also take place simultaneously, with said individual switching their personality at the click of a button.

Going back to the social thing, perhaps this is a bit extreme but I consider online social groups to be almost like gangs. They exhibit some behaviours associated with gang culture. Most social groups I’ve seen have a ring leader of some sort whom everyone respects or at least fears to some extent. This is often gained through intimidation and threats. Of course I hardly see online social groups going out to knife opposing gangs. Arguably that sort of thing takes place with words in place of weapons. Or maybe I’ve been listening to too much Fall Out Boy.

This might be asking too much since I know not everyone is willing to disclose their personal happenings on the internet for different reasons, but how differently do you behave within different circles on the internet? What are the expectations for acceptable behaviour within these circles? What would happen if you acted outside these norms? Would it concern your friends or would it cause you to be outcast and accepted by a different group?

Comments are off

My New Phobia

29November2007

After much consideration I’ve decided I am neophobic, which is a fear of anything new. I have no traumatic childhood experience to back up this claim, neither am I one of those people who don’t believe in upgrading Wordpress. Unfortunately I couldn’t find a word that meant having a fear of updating website layouts, and neophobia was close enough.

I know Bobbi-Lee suffers from the same condition. Maybe I should set up a self help group where we can all talk about our new layout trauma’s and how we can overcome them. If anyone wants to hold a meeting where we can all cry I’ll bring Oreo’s. Just name the place.

The reason I am bringing this up is because I’ve been developing a new layout over the course of about two or three months. As with every new layout I make it’s taken such a long time because I’ve also redeveloped content and taken care of every little detail I can possibly think of. I’ve tested the layout in both Firefox, IE and Opera and since most browsers render the same as they do I have no doubt it will look fine.

And yet I still can’t bring myself to activating it. It’s sitting on my presentation page on Wordpress, but still I can’t take the plunge and push the button. It’d be like saying goodbye to an old semantically incongruent friend.

I need lots of support to publish my newer, better layout. And a funeral for the old one. And no, I don’t want a theme switcher. That’s just unwholesome.

On a side note, I do actually have one real life phobia - needles. The word for it is aichmophobia which sounds like a German word if pronounced funny. I actually feel a little bit dizzy just thinking about it so I’m not going to discuss it further.

Edit: As it turns out I’m not as phobic as I thought. Please welcome my new layout with warm fuzzy feelings. Anything apart from that might cause me to foam at the mouth. It’s 2AM and I shouldn’t be here. Er… a couple of things are broken. I will fix them soon. Hopefully. Maybe. Someday.

Comments are off

Long Live the New Flesh

18November2007

Who are we in a digital sense? Online we perceive others differently, as interpreted by a series of images and text that wouldn’t be logically presented in a real life format. Often we construct our bodies online creating an identity that we control and manipulate - some identities are truer than others.

How does our existence vary from who we are on and off screen? One could argue you are what you become, and if feigning a characteristic online were done consistently then eventually it would become a part of that individual. Therefore an online persona is an extension of a dormant personality. On the other hand, it is easier to fake who we are not.

To what extent do we become part of the screen and fuse with our formulated online identities? We are a generation defined by our blogs, our mobile phones, our laptops, our televisions, our IPod’s, our DS’s and our digital interests. There is almost an obsessive quality in having all aspects of ourselves as close to the online world as possible. We carry a piece of our digital fingerprint where ever we go.

Could a screen be compared to an eye that looks on into another world? Is this eye omnipotent or is it limited? We make ourselves and destroy ourselves on a whim with little or no repercussions online. Yet there are still standards, netiquette and ways to behave within different circles. We are still controlled by our environment - a huge irony that contradicts the freedom of the internet.

Comments are off

Wanted: A Life

12November2007

I’ve never doubted for a minute what my interests are, and have always expressed them with profound tenacity. Those interests are undoubtedly the internet and design - as reflected in my chosen course at university. So why the hell am I suddenly getting cold feet? I keep second guessing myself and I feel that I’m being overwhelmed despite the fact that I know that I do reasonably well.

I apologise for those of you who aren’t regular readers because I’m just venting. To be honest I don’t have much to complain about seeing as I have a roof over my head, food and a loving family. Maybe it’s because I get mildly depressed when it starts becoming winter.  I suppose it begs the question “What’s up Doc?”

Despite me banging on about how great university is, how much I love it and how enriching my course is the truth is that I’ve been fooling myself to stop myself from going insane. I’ve invested over £10,000 (only thus far) in something that has been of little or no use to me. Everything I have done at university I learnt first hand from maintaining a shoddy excuse for a personal website. I’m constantly improving through my own means rather than by learning a single fucking thing from my lecturers.

I feel patronised, frustrated and very bloody let down by what I thought would be the most mentally fulfilling stage in my life. My head used to be full of ideas and now it’s as if I sport a helium balloon on my shoulders.

No one I’ve talking to in real life has taken me seriously. I haven’t had any sound advice regarding what I think or feel in regards to my future and what I’m doing. Should I just waste around £20,000 in order to obtain a little sheet of paper declaring I can successfully open Dreamweaver and do some funky shit with HTML? Or should I drop out whilst I’m ahead and try to get an apprenticeship? Should I take up fine art again seeing as it’s the only course I’ve ever taken where I’ve felt intellectually stimulated?

Even better, don’t answer the above. Don’t comment if you don’t want to. I have to make my own unbiased decision, I just wish it wasn’t so fucking hard. Taking initiative is the only way I’m going to get something done in my life, so I guess I better grow a pair.

Comments are off

A Guide to Access

17October2007

This is mostly for any DIM students who visit my blog, but everyone is free to add or comment. I don’t claim to be an access buff, neither do I think I know everything. This is just a guide including some very good resources, reasons why designing accessibly benefits both users and designers and a few easy to follow tips and tricks. Hi Dave!! :)

So how can we define access? According to the dictionary it means the right to enter, reach or gain access to. Access can be applied to all types of users, whether it be someone with a visual disability or someone who is using a browser different to what you normally use. It sounds a little daunting, and sure it can be pretentious to gloat about having an accessible site but the truth of the matter is that having an accessible website makes things easier for everyone, including yourself.

Why Design with Accessibility in Mind?

Usually an accessible website is a tidy website. The coding is neat and easy to follow, the design is flexible so all types of users on all types of browsers, machines, devices and resolutions can view the same page and navigate it with ease. Since accessible design is mostly valid design the amount of time the site takes to load decreases substantially. Coding semantically is coding logically - a semantically coded website will still make sense without CSS. This in turn is awesome for search engines which will be able to pick out key words easily.

However accessible design isn’t just about coding - there is a large chunk of visual considerations to undertake. More than often someone who accesses a website will have a visual disability whether it be as simple as being long-sighted, colour blind or even partially blind. Sometimes someone will visit a website using dial-up or will have to pay for the amount of bandwidth they use. What about folks who are browsing at work and don’t have Flash or JavaScript enabled for security reasons?

Designing Accessibly

Lesson number one is don’t design like a twat. As obvious as this is it’s probably the most difficult concept for people to grasp. This includes using tiny text, no contrast, minuscule layouts, heavy graphics, Flash with great importance placed on it (i.e. for navigational purposes), yadda yadda. There are many examples of how to design like an idiot, and a good few of how not to. I’ll walk you through this concept and tell you how to avoid such simple mistakes.

Coding Accessibly

Don’t panic. I know all DIM students love code to bits (internet applications… the good times) but there’s no reason to cry with exuberant joy. For all outsiders, DIM students don’t like code. We design. Ug ug. Er anyway, coding validly is coding doing things the simple way. It’s easier to update, easier to read and it visually looks tidy and, contrary to popular DIM belief, is not frightening at all.

So what are the common mistakes of a bad coder? Not using a DocType, invalid coding that returns many mistakes on the W3C validator, ignoring the rules of semantic coding, using tables to make layouts, and other equally naughty things. I’ll detail these and provide links a plenty. Anyone willing to contribute please do since this isn’t my forte.

Other Points to Consider

There is a huge war of some sort happening between validity enthusiasts, accessibility lovers and usability admirers. I’m not going to get involved because I can see things getting nasty, but I think they all lean on each other so embrace the fear and design for your users whilst keeping an eye on each of those subjects.

Good design isn’t born from accessible design. This is a LIE. Good design comes from being creative within limited situations, and coming out with something extraordinary despite what was thought possible. Putting the blame on the tools is just the trademark of a bad designer.

There are other little things you can do to increase accessibility on your site. For example, access keys are not the most imperative thing you can add to your website, but they are useful for some people who find it difficult or otherwise impossible to use a mouse. This can be someone with a physical or cognitive impairment, or even someone with a dodgy laptop touch pad. Use them in main navigation by tacking them onto links using ‘accesskey=”*”‘ and sticking a relevant character where the asterisk is. For example, Home could be H, or if done numerically 1.

If you use JavaScript, Flash, Shockwave or anything else that requires enabling or a plug in make sure that there are alternatives. There are simple ways to make JavaScript degrade seamlessly using CSS. Flash and Shockwave can be alternated with still images or text on browsers which do not support it.

Resources

Footnotes

Hope you DIM guys find this useful for AUFDW! And for those of you who aren’t in DIM, if you don’t want to comment explicitly on the above then provide your own opinions or insight on accessibility, or even your own links and resources. I don’t claim this entry to be absolutely perfect or complete in any way, so contributions (and hopefully not but if necessary, corrections) are most welcome.

Comments are off

In Rainbows

12October2007

For those of you who are musically inclined Radiohead has just released an album called “In Rainbows”. Firstly, I’m not a massive Radiohead fan but I wanted to post a few comments on the concept they’re driving at. It is one of the first of its kind, an album that is being distributed on the internet for free! Looks like they are taking pointers from David Bowie who believes that music should be free for fans and that bands should make money from merchandising and touring.

Honestly, I agree that music should be free - besides there’s something unwholesome about disagreeing with David Bowie. There is way too much money flowing into that industry and although I do understand that even band members have to eat (except Beck - he has no anus), I don’t think it would hurt them to have to work harder to earn their keep. Besides the internet should be more about sharing and not so much about the RIAA being all over your arse. What better way to communicate with fans than through the most interactive medium out there?

However there are some other things that have sprung to mind. If music was free then how would a band sell itself? Would it mean that their music would have to be much more revolutionary and experimental in order to lure fans? Or would they have to focus in on their image more to attract fans? I reckon there would be people to fall into both categories, but eventually musicians of a more talented persuasion would triumph. A perfect example of this would be Paris Hilton’s album which was simply about selling an image and not music. Naturally it flopped.

Back to Radiohead, I’m listening to the album as I go about my business online and I have to say some of it is listenable but overall I find it a little dreary and repetitive. Fabulous concept, maybe the wrong sort of band to attempt it? I’d love to see some really pretentious band releasing a free album and in turn swallowing their pride. It’d be the ultimate eye opener.

There are a few songs I reckon the album is worth downloading for - 15 Step and Reckoner are melancholic but they have a nice little melody/beat running through them. I’m not one to really talk music, so just get the album and have a listen for yourself.

To wrap this up I’ll just add my thoughts on the website. I’m a lover of concept rather than the execution of ideas (unless it’s done so badly that it hurts - Britz + VMA) and the website really does capture the concept well. It makes a change to fill out the price rather than my card details, although I can’t help but feel the process is a little long winded; probably to emphasize how free it is which in my opinion is a little patronising. However it does feel somewhat satisfying to reach a typical receipt page with a nice little “£0″ price tag hovering at the bottom.

Aesthetically I like the simplicity of the site. The text has three stark colours at the very most per page and the background is fairly nondescript. I suppose this is reflecting the nature of the product, being that this is quite simply the transferral of music from a band to a consumer. No strings attached, no physical exchange to complicate matters.

So what do you think about making music free? Any thoughts on the album “In Rainbows”?

Comments are off
Subscribe