Explaining the benefits to “Dummies”
I have meeting with a content manager who is technically challenged. This person wants me to explain in very basic terms how important Web Standards are and how they can directly benefit her private website (no login intranet).
Problem number 1: Words like “Structured Markup in our HTML document” and “Cascading Style Sheets” are hard concepts to grasp. What real world examples demonstrate the advantages?
Problem Number 2: The users being pilots, ensures that only users with very good eye sight and no disabilities use it. Does this mean that this website would be exempt from legal requirements even though the DDA state that all websites have to be Accessible?!!!!
Johan De Silva / Portfolio
Last edited by Johan007 on 02 Jun 2008 01:07 pm; edited 1 time in total
Share: 
You could highlight the benefits of separation of mark-up (although I'd probably describe it as 'content' to the uninitiated... when pushed I explain that HTML's function is to describe content) and design. Point out that future redesign will be quicker, the site will load faster on slow connections, there are SEO benefits and there are browser compatibility benefits (what works now will work in the future) etc...
Don't know about problem number 2 though.
Share:
Presumably it's also used by managers, supervisors and other staff? If so, they might not meet the physical or mental requirements for pilots and therefore the system must be accessible to them. An inaccessible intranet prevents the company from being a genuinely Equal Opportunities employer.
Share:
Cerbs right imo. There are VERY few situations were it is not possible that a blind user may want to use the site.
If I knew more about the site, I could probably be more specific/real world.
Share:
| Johan007 wrote: |
| ...how they can directly benefit her private website (no login intranet). ... |
Do you mean the web site is on a closed network and only available to people who have access to the network ? Or is it on the internet and only intended for people in a particular company or group?
| Johan007 wrote: |
| Problem Number 2:[/b] The users being pilots, ensures that only users with very good eye sight and no disabilities use it. Does this mean that this website would be exempt from legal requirements even though the DDA state that all websites have to be Accessible?!!!! |
"Employers may not discriminate against a disabled person when recruiting, employing, promoting, dismissing or making redundant members of staff.....The law covers employers of all sizes and most occupations, except service in the armed forces."
from business link
Normally that would be your answer to problem 2 : i.e. designing accessible interface now saves lots of time and rework at some stage in the future when you hire person who just happens to be blind.
However I suspect that pilots might be outside the "most occupations" for obvious reasons. So where does that leave you ?
Well, instead of thinking about screen readers and the implication of vision impaired users, what about thinking about mobile access or read along? If there are long articles on the web site that your pilots need to read, some of them might prefer to listen while they are doing something else. Or, as seems likely in the job, your pilots are on the move a lot, they may have to access the intranet through PDAs or mobile devises that have much smaller screens and slower connections. Both of these access methods are much improved if the site is designed on accessible principles.
Share:
Hi Lucy
The site is on the internet and only intended for airline pilots in a particular company, but of cause the content managers are not pilots so I can win the argument whatever.
So far I have started to write an page as to explain why that I may use as a basis for for a presentation... If there is anything I can add or take away let me know...
Web Standards
Before web standards, websites were typically built using unregulated mix of languages and archaic methods that worked on the majority of computers of that day.
This made it harder and sometimes impossible developing new software that used this content. This software includes Content Management Systems, Screen Readers for the blind, Search Engines and browsers for PC’s, Mobile Phones and new immerging technology.
The DDA made law for all websites to be Accessible to users with disabilities and recommend web designers follow Web Standards set out by the World Wide Web Consortium (W3C).
W3C is an international consortium that develops Web standards and guidelines designed to ensure long-term growth for the Web. A current most important standard is the separation of content from design:
1. HTML's function is to describe content.
2. CSS function is to display design.
Web sites at the time also used data tables to design and layout parts of the website. Early versions of HTML had never intended to include design as part of the early Web. CSS and newer versions HTML was later introduced.
Web sites at the time also used another language called JavaScript to replace what could now have been created using HTML and CSS. This typically included all drop down menus that fail most standards.
Other benefits include:
1. Modern browsers are much better at rendering Web standards
2. Increased Speed due to much lower file size
3. Maintains Visual Consistency that strengthens your brand and makes your site more usable.
4. Makes future updates cheaper and quicker to implement.
Johan De Silva / Portfolio
Share:
| Johan007 wrote: |
| Hi Lucy
The site is on the internet and only intended for airline pilots in a particular company, but of cause the content managers are not pilots so I can win the argument whatever. |
| Johan007 wrote: |
|
The DDA made law for all websites to be Accessible to users with disabilities and recommend web designers follow Web Standards set out by the World Wide Web Consortium (W3C). |
My understanding of the relevant sections of the DDA (19 & 20) is that they make it unlawful for a service provider to discriminate against a disabled person if that service is normally provided to the public. Your web site is not intended for the public so is not required to be accessible under these regulations.
| Johan007 wrote: |
|
Other benefits include: 1. Modern browsers are much better at rendering Web standards 2. Increased Speed due to much lower file size 3. Maintains Visual Consistency that strengthens your brand and makes your site more usable. 4. Makes future updates cheaper and quicker to implement. |
If you are trying to sell it to the boss could you work though some ROI figures to make it more persuasive?
benefit 2. File size of pages x,y,&z is 1Mb. They are downloaded 50,000 times per month which costs £n on our hosting package. If we re-wrote them paying attention to web standards, accessibility and minimal code the file sizes would be 0.? Mb. That would save us £m per month on our hosting package. Its possible there are benefits for the users of increased size although only if the files were huge and reduce to tiny and they are on slow connections. Difficult to argue this one otherwise.
benefit 4. the last re-design required us to alter every page on the web site. Each page needed 1 hour to amend the style = n hours which cost £ a lot. If it had been written in HTML with separate CSS file for styling we would have only had to change one file which would have taken much fewer hours and would have saved £m.
Remember to include a reasonable cost of bringing the current web site up to accessible web standards level and use the figures to show how quickly (or not) they will get pay back.
Do you have any figures or evidence for benefit 1 ? Its not one I've heard before. And benefit 3 is a little weak - its quite possible to make a web standards and technically accessible web site that looks dreadful and is a nightmare to use.
Share:
Many thanks for your advice it has been useful and I am not going to mention DDA compliance as it also seems aggressive approach I want to avoid.
| lucybuykx wrote: |
| benefit 2. File size of pages x,y,&z is 1Mb. They are downloaded 50,000 times per month which costs £n on our hosting package. |
| lucybuykx wrote: |
| Do you have any figures or evidence for benefit 1 ? |
Johan De Silva / Portfolio
Share:
Seems sound but rather academic. Maybe emphasis the practical benefits to her and skip the history lesson? If you spark her interest and she wants to know more, then you can show off with it. 
- The better performance through less code per page will make employees more productive.
- A central stylesheet aids consistency throughout the website, which is essential for usability and therefore productivity.
- Routine maintenance cheaper through logical, standardised code.
- Re-branding, design changes and expansion are made cheaper as content won't need substantial changes.
Share:
I think Johan007 has raised the perennial problem around promoting accessible and web standards coding. Its very difficult to sell to business because it doesn't have a measurable ROI unless you have distinct market that you can't convert without it.
Are there any successful pitches that anyone can share or is this business based entirely on selling to the choir?
Share:
Agree I would be interested in reading about others experiences from pitches.
Another rather ignored but powerful advantage of standard based design is empowering wysiwyg editors with styles. They all seem to effortlessly provide inline styling. However as part of this pitch we would love the ability for the wysiwyg editor (we use FCKeditor) to have an option to style block level tags via another drop down. I can not find an editor that does this and is major draw back in harnessing more of the power of CSS. I presume no one knows of an editor that can style both and the interface would require separate 2 drop downs for grabbing a block (eg: <ol>, <ul>, <table>) and wrapping it with <div> and the other creating an inline tag <span> around text?
Johan De Silva / Portfolio
Share:
A friend of mine runs a bed & breakfast. He asked me to comment on his shiny new website. It's very good...apart from some glaring problems for people with visual impairment.
When I tried to tell him about accessibility (including his legal responsibilities) his response? "I don't get guests with visual problems; so they won't be looking at my site. So, no problem."
I'm thinking of getting a new friend...
Share:
| fogey wrote: |
| A friend of mine runs a bed & breakfast. .... "I don't get guests with visual problems; so they won't be looking at my site. So, no problem." |
Maybe the number on the door is so small they can't find it and end up at the brand-name-hotel down the road !
Share:
| Johan007 wrote: |
| Another rather ignored but powerful advantage of standard based design is empowering wysiwyg editors with styles. They all seem to effortlessly provide inline styling. |
Not sure if you mean "effortlessly" for the computer or for the human user. I avoid wysiwig editors like the plague because they decide what needs to go and often have large amounts of javascript and images that hog RAM as they process with every letter you type.
Basecamp has made a very successful product with no wisiwig in sight. They've not even implemented all of Textile. Proves to me that all those extra features are there for marketing rather than really needed by users.
Share:
| lucybuykx wrote: |
| Maybe the number on the door is so small they can't find it and end up at the brand-name-hotel down the road ! |
Actually, I wonder if other people in rural, isolated areas have similar experiences?
Share: