{"rowid": 24, "title": "Kill It With Fire! What To Do With Those Dreaded FAQs", "contents": "In the mid-1640s, a man named Matthew Hopkins attempted to rid England of the devil\u2019s influence, primarily by demanding payment for the service of tying women to chairs and tossing them into lakes.\n\nUnsurprisingly, his methods garnered criticism. Hopkins defended himself\u00a0in The Discovery of Witches\u00a0in 1647, subtitled \u201cCertaine Queries answered, which have been and are likely to be objected against MATTHEW HOPKINS, in his way of finding out Witches.\u201d\n\nEach \u201cquerie\u201d was written in the voice of an imagined detractor, and answered in the voice of an imagined defender (always referring to himself as \u201cthe discoverer,\u201d or \u201chim\u201d):\n\n\n\tQuer. 14.\n\n\tAll that the witch-finder doth is to fleece the country of their money, and therefore rides and goes to townes to have imployment, and promiseth them faire promises, and it may be doth nothing for it, and possesseth many men that they have so many wizzards and so many witches in their towne, and so hartens them on to entertaine him.\n\n\tAns.\n\n\tYou doe him a great deale of wrong in every of these particulars.\n\n\nHopkins\u2019 self-defense was an early modern English FAQ.\n\nDigital beginnings\n\nQuestion and answer formatting certainly isn\u2019t new, and stretches back much further than witch-hunt days. But its most modern, most notorious, most reviled incarnation is the internet\u2019s frequently asked questions page.\n\nFAQs began showing up on pre-internet mailing lists\u00a0as a way for list members to answer and pre-empt newcomers\u2019 repetitive questions:\n\n\n\tThe presumption was that new users would download archived past messages through ftp. In practice, this rarely happened and the users tended to post questions to the mailing list instead of searching its archives. Repeating the \u201cright\u201d answers becomes tedious\u2026\n\n\nWhen all the users of a system can hear all the other users, FAQs make a lot of sense: the conversation needs to be managed and manageable. FAQs were a stopgap for the technological limitations of the time.\n\nBut the internet moved past mailing lists. Online information can be stored, searched, filtered, and muted; we choose and control our conversations. New users no longer rely on the established community to answer their questions for them.\n\nAnd yet, FAQs are still around. They\u2019re a content anti-pattern, replicated from site to site to solve a problem we no longer have.\n\nWhat we hate when we hate FAQs\n\nAs someone who creates and structures online content \u2013 always with the goal of making that content as useful as possible to people \u2013 FAQs drive me absolutely batty. Almost universally, FAQs represent the opposite of useful. A brief list of their sins:\n\n\nDouble trouble\nDuplicated content is practically a given with FAQs. They\u2019re written as though they\u2019ll be accessed in a vacuum \u2013 but search results, navigation patterns, and curiosity ensure that users will seek answers throughout the site. Is our goal to split their focus? To make them uncertain of where to look? To divert them to an isolated microcosm of the website? Duplicated content means user confusion (to say nothing of the duplicated workload for maintaining content).\nLeaving the job unfinished\nMany FAQs fail before they\u2019re even out of the gate, presenting a list of questions that\u2019s incomplete (too short and careless to be helpful) or irrelevant (avoiding users\u2019 real concerns in favor of soundbites). Alternately, if the right questions are there, the answers may be convoluted, jargon-heavy, or otherwise difficult to understand.\nLong lists of not-my-question\nGetting a single answer often means sifting through a haystack of questions. For each potential question, the user must read, comprehend, assess, move on, rinse, repeat. That\u2019s a lot of legwork for little reward \u2013 and a lot of opportunity for mistakes. Users may miss their question, or they may fail to recognize a differently worded version of their question, or they may not notice when their sought-after answer appears somewhere they didn\u2019t expect.\nThe ventriloquist act\nFAQs shift the point of view. While websites speak on behalf of the organization (\u201cour products,\u201d \u201cour services,\u201d \u201cyou can call us for assistance,\u201d etc.), FAQs speak as the user \u2013 \u201cI can\u2019t find my password\u201d or \u201cHow do I sign up?\u201d Both voices are written from the first-person perspective, but speak for different entities, which is disorienting: it breaks the tone and messaging across the website. It\u2019s also presumptuous: why do you get to speak for the user?\n\n\nThese all underscore FAQs\u2019 fatal flaw: they are content without context, delivered without regard for the larger experience of the website. You can hear the absurdity in the name itself: if users are asking the same questions so frequently, then there is an obvious gulf between their needs and the site content. (And if not, then we have a labeling problem.)\n\nInstead of sending users to a jumble of maybe-it\u2019s-here-maybe-it\u2019s-not questions, the answers to FAQs should be found naturally throughout a website. They are not separated, not isolated, not other. They are\u00a0the content.\n\nTo present it otherwise is to create a runaround, and users know it. Jay Martel\u2019s parody, \u201cF.A.Q.s about F.A.Q.s\u201d\u00a0captures the silliness and frustration of such a system:\n\n\n\tQ: Why are you so rude?\n\n\tA: For that answer, you would have to consult an F.A.Q.s about F.A.Q.s about F.A.Q.s. But your time might be better served by simply abandoning your search for a magic answer and taking responsibility for your own profound ignorance.\n\n\nFAQs aren\u2019t magic answers. They don\u2019t resolve a content dilemma or even help users. Yet they keep cropping up, defiant, weedy, impossible to eradicate.\n\nWhere are they all coming from?\n\nBlame it on this: writing is hard. When generating content, most of us do whatever it takes to get some words on the screen. And the format of question and answer makes it easy: a reactionary first stab at content development.\n\nAfter all, the point of website content is to answer users\u2019 questions. So this \u2013 to give everyone credit \u2013 is a really good move. Content creators who think in terms of questions and answers are actually thinking of their users, particularly first-time users, trying to anticipate their needs and write towards them.\n\nIt\u2019s a good start. But it\u2019s scaffolding: writing that helps you get to the writing you\u2019re supposed to be doing. It supports you while you write your way to the heart of your content. And once you get there, you have to look back and take the scaffolding down.\n\nLeaving content in the Q&A format that helped you develop it is missing the point. You\u2019re not there to build scaffolding. You have to see your content in its naked purpose and determine the best method for communicating that purpose \u2013 and it usually won\u2019t be what got you there.\n\nThe goal (to borrow a lesson from content management systems) is to separate the content from its presentation, to let the meaning of the content inform its display.\n\nThis is, of course, a nice theory.\n\nAn occasionally necessary evil\n\nI have a lot of clients who adore FAQs. They\u2019ve developed their content over a long period of time. They\u2019ve listened to the questions their users are asking. And they\u2019ve answered them all on a page that I simply cannot get them to part with.\n\nWhich means I\u2019ve had to consider that there may be occasions where an FAQ page is appropriate.\n\nAs an example: one of my clients is a financial office in a large institution. Because this office manages several third-party systems that serve a range of niche audiences, they had developed FAQs that addressed hyper-specific instances of dysfunction within systems for different users \u2013 \u00e0 la \u201cI\u2019m a financial director and my employee submitted an expense report in such-and-such system and it returned such-and-such error. What do I do?\u201d\n\nYes, this content could be removed from the question format and rewritten. But I\u2019m not sure it would be an improvement. It won\u2019t necessarily resolve concerns about length and searchability, and the different audiences may complicate the delivery. And since the work of rewriting it didn\u2019t fit into the client workflow (small team, no writers, pressed for time), I didn\u2019t recommend the change.\n\nI\u2019ve had to make peace with not being to torch all the FAQs on the internet. Some content, like troubleshooting information or complex procedures, may be better in that format. It may be the smartest way for a particular client to handle that particular information.\n\nOf course, this has to be determined on a case-by-case basis, taking into account the amount of content, the subject matter, the skill levels of the content creators, the publishing workflow, and the search habits of the users.\n\nIf you determine that an FAQ page is the only way to go, ask yourself:\n\n\n\tIs there a better label or more specific term for the page (support, troubleshooting, product concerns, etc.)?\n\tIs there way to structure the page, categorize the questions, or otherwise make it easier for users to navigate quickly to the answer they need?\n\tIs a question and answer format absolutely the best way to communicate this information?\n\n\nForm follows function\n\nJust as a question and answer format isn\u2019t necessarily required to deliver the content, neither is it an inappropriate method in and of itself. Content professionals have developed a knee-jerk reaction:\u00a0It\u2019s an FAQ page! Quick, burn it! Buuuuurn it!\n\nBut there\u2019s no inherent evil in questions and answers. Framing content in an interrogatory construct is no more a deal with the devil than subheads and paragraphs, or narrative arcs, or bullet points.\n\nYes, FAQs are riddled with communication snafus. They deserve, more often than not, to be tied to a chair and thrown into a lake. But that wouldn\u2019t fix our content problems. FAQs are a shiny and obvious target for our frustration, but they\u2019re not unique in their flaws. In any format, in any display, in any kind of page, weak content can rear its ugly, poorly written head.\n\nIt\u2019s not the Q&A that\u2019s to blame, it\u2019s bad content. Content without context will always fail users. That\u2019s the real witch in our midst.", "year": "2013", "author": "Lisa Maria Martin", "author_slug": "lisamariamartin", "published": "2013-12-08T00:00:00+00:00", "url": "https://24ways.org/2013/what-to-do-with-faqs/", "topic": "content"} {"rowid": 251, "title": "The System, the Search, and the Food Bank", "contents": "Imagine a warehouse, half the length of a football field, with a looped conveyer belt down the center. \nOn the belt are plastic bins filled with assortments of shelf-stable food\u2014one may have two bags of potato chips, seventeen pudding cups, and a box of tissues; the next, a dozen cans of beets. The conveyer belt is ringed with large, empty cardboard boxes, each labeled with categories like \u201cBottled Water\u201d or \u201cCereal\u201d or \u201cCandy.\u201d \nSuch was the scene at my local food bank a few Saturdays ago, when some friends and I volunteered for a shift sorting donated food items. Our job was to fill the labeled cardboard boxes with the correct items nabbed from the swiftly moving, randomly stocked plastic bins.\nI could scarcely believe my good fortune of assignments. You want me to sort things? Into categories? For several hours? And you say there\u2019s an element of time pressure? Listen, is there some sort of permanent position I could be conscripted into.\nLook, I can\u2019t quite explain it: I just know that I love sorting, organizing, and classifying things\u2014groceries at a food bank, but also my bookshelves, my kitchen cabinets, my craft supplies, my dishwasher arrangement, yes I am a delight to live with, why do you ask?\nThe opportunity to create meaning from nothing is at the core of my excitement, which is why I\u2019ve tried to build a career out of organizing digital content, and why I brought a frankly frightening level of enthusiasm to the food bank. \u201cI can\u2019t believe they\u2019re letting me do this,\u201d I whispered in awe to my conveyer belt neighbor as I snapped up a bag of popcorn for the Snacks box with the kind of ferocity usually associated with birds of prey.\nThe jumble of donated items coming into the center need to be sorted in order for the food bank to be able to quantify, package, and distribute the food to those who need it (I sense a metaphor coming on). It\u2019s not just a nice-to-have that we spent our morning separating cookies from carrots\u2014it\u2019s a crucial step in the process. Organization makes the difference between chaos and sense, between randomness and usefulness, whether we\u2019re talking about donated groceries or\u2014there it is\u2014web content.\nThis happens through the magic of criteria matching. In order for us to sort the food bank donations correctly, we needed to know not only the categories we were sorting into, but also the criteria for each category. Does canned ravioli count as Canned Soup? Does enchilada sauce count as Tomatoes? Do protein bars count as Snacks? (Answers: yes, yes, and only if they are under 10 grams of protein or will expire within three months.) \nIs X a Y? was the question at the heart of our food sorting\u2014but it\u2019s also at the heart of any information-seeking behavior. When we are organizing, or looking for, any kind of information, we are asking ourselves:\n\nWhat is the criteria that defines Y?\nDoes X meet that criteria?\n\nWe don\u2019t usually articulate it so concretely because it\u2019s a background process, only leaping to consciousness when we encounter a stumbling block. If cans of broth flew by on the conveyer belt, it didn\u2019t require much thought to place them in the Canned Soup box. Boxed broth, on the other hand, wasn\u2019t allowed, causing a small cognitive hiccup\u2014this X is NOT a Y\u2014that sometimes meant having to re-sort our boxes.\nOn the web, we\u2019re interested\u2014I would hope\u2014in reducing cognitive hiccups for our users. We are interested in making our apps easy to use, our websites easy to navigate, our information easy to access. After all, most of the time, the process of using the internet is one of uniting a question with an answer\u2014Is this article from a trustworthy source? Is this clothing the style I want? Is this company paying their workers a living wage? Is this website one that can answer my question? Is X a Y?\nWe have a responsibility, therefore, to make information easy for our users to find, understand, and act on. This means\u2014well, this means a lot of things, and I\u2019ve got limited space here, so let\u2019s focus on these three lessons from the food bank:\n\n\nUse plain, familiar language. This advice seems to be given constantly, but that\u2019s because it\u2019s solid and it\u2019s not followed enough. Your menu labels, page names, and headings need to reflect the word choice of your users. Think how much harder it would have been to sort food if the boxes were labeled according to nutritional content, grocery store aisle number, or Latin name. How much would it slow sorting down if the Tomatoes box were labeled Nightshades? It sounds silly, but it\u2019s not that different from sites that use industry jargon, company lingo, acronyms (oh, yes, I\u2019ve seen it), or other internally focused language when trying to provide wayfinding for users. Choose words that your audience knows\u2014not only will they be more likely to spot what they\u2019re looking for on your site or app, but you\u2019ll turn up more often in search results.\n\n\nCreate consistency in all things. Missteps in consistency look like my earlier chicken broth example\u2014changing up how something looks, sounds, or functions creates a moment of cognitive dissonance, and those moments add up. The names of products, the names of brands, the names of files and forms and pages, the names of processes and procedures and concepts\u2014these all need to be consistently spelled, punctuated, linked, and referenced, no matter what section or level the user is in. If submenus are visible in one section, they should be visible in all. If calls-to-action are a graphic button in one section, they are the same graphic button in all. Every affordance, every module, every design choice sets up user expectations; consistency keeps those expectations afloat, making for a smoother experience overall.\n\nMake the system transparent. By this, I do not mean that every piece of content should be elevated at all times. The horror. But I do mean that we should make an effort to communicate the boundaries of the digital space from any given corner within. Navigation structures operate just as much as a table of contents as they do a method of moving from one place to another. Page hierarchies help explain content relationships, communicating conceptual relevancy and relative importance. Submenus illustrate which related concepts may be found within a given site section. Take care to show information that conveys the depth and breadth of the system, rather than obscuring it.\n\nThis idea of transparency was perhaps the biggest challenge we experienced in food sorting. Imagine us volunteers as users, each looking for a specific piece of information in the larger system. Like any new visitor to a website, we came into the system not knowing the full picture. We didn\u2019t know every category label around the conveyer belt, nor what criteria each category warranted. \nThe system wasn\u2019t transparent for us, so we had to make it transparent as we went. We had to stop what we were doing and ask questions. We\u2019d ask staff members. We\u2019d ask more seasoned volunteers. We\u2019d ask each other. We\u2019d make guesses, and guess wrongly, and mess up the boxes, and correct our mistakes, and learn.\nThe more we learned, the easier the sorting became. That is, we were able to sort more quickly, more efficiently, more accurately. The better we understood the system, the better we were at interacting with it.\nThe same is true of our users: the better they understand digital spaces, the more effective they are at using them. But visitors to our apps and websites do not have the luxury of learning the whole system. The fumbling trial-and-error method that I used at the food bank can, on a website, drive users away\u2014or, worse, misinform or hurt them. \nThis is why we must make choices that prioritize transparency, consistency, and familiarity. Our users want to know if X is a Y\u2014well-sorted content can give them the answer.", "year": "2018", "author": "Lisa Maria Martin", "author_slug": "lisamariamartin", "published": "2018-12-16T00:00:00+00:00", "url": "https://24ways.org/2018/the-system-the-search-and-the-food-bank/", "topic": "content"} {"rowid": 291, "title": "Information Literacy Is a Design Problem", "contents": "Information literacy, wrote Dr. Carol Kulthau in her 1987 paper \u201cInformation Skills for an Information Society,\u201d is \u201cthe ability to read and to use information essential for everyday life\u201d\u2014that is, to effectively navigate a world built on \u201ccomplex masses of information generated by computers and mass media.\u201d\nNearly thirty years later, those \u201ccomplex masses of information\u201d have only grown wilder, thornier, and more constant. We call the internet a firehose, yet we\u2019re loathe to turn it off (or even down). The amount of information we consume daily is staggering\u2014and yet our ability to fully understand it all remains frustratingly insufficient. \nThis should hit a very particular chord for those of us working on the web. We may be developers, designers, or strategists\u2014we may not always be responsible for the words themselves\u2014but we all know that communication is much more than just words. From fonts to form fields, every design decision that we make changes the way information is perceived\u2014for better or for worse.\nWhat\u2019s more, the design decisions that we make feed into larger patterns. They don\u2019t just affect the perception of a single piece of information on a single site; they start to shape reader expectations of information anywhere. Users develop cumulative mental models of how websites should be: where to find a search bar, where to look at contact information, how to filter a product list. \nAnd yet: our models fail us. Fundamentally, we\u2019re not good at parsing information, and that\u2019s troubling. Our experience of an \u201cinformation society\u201d may have evolved, but the skills Dr. Kuhlthau spoke of are even more critical now: our lives depend on information literacy.\nPatterns from words\nLet\u2019s start at the beginning: with the words. Our choice of words can drastically alter a message, from its emotional resonance to its context to its literal meaning. Sometimes we can use word choice for good, to reinvigorate old, forgotten, or unfairly besmirched ideas.\nOne time at a wedding bbq we labeled the coleslaw BRASSICA MIXTA so people wouldn\u2019t skip it based on false hatred.\u2014 Eileen Webb (@webmeadow) November 27, 2016\n\nWe can also use clever word choice to build euphemisms, to name sensitive or intimate concepts without conjuring their full details. This trick gifts us with language like \u201cthe beast with two backs\u201d (thanks, Shakespeare!) and \u201csurfing the crimson wave\u201d (thanks, Cher Horowitz!).\nBut when we grapple with more serious concepts\u2014war, death, human rights\u2014this habit of declawing our language gets dangerous. Using more discrete wording serves to nullify the concepts themselves, euphemizing them out of sight and out of mind.\nThe result? Politicians never lie, they just \u201cmisspeak.\u201d Nobody\u2019s racist, but plenty of people are \u201ceconomically anxious.\u201d Nazis have rebranded as \u201calt-right.\u201d \nI\u2019m not an asshole, I\u2019m just alt-nice.\u2014 Andi Zeisler (@andizeisler) November 22, 2016\n\nThe problem with euphemisms like these is that they quickly infect everyday language. We use the words we hear around us. The more often we see \u201calt-right\u201d instead of \u201cNazi,\u201d the more likely we are to use that phrase ourselves\u2014normalizing the term as well as the terrible ideas behind it.\nPatterns from sentences\nThat process of normalization gets a boost from the media, our main vector of information about the world outside ourselves. Headlines control how we interpret the news that follows\u2014even if the story contradicts it in the end. We hear the framing more clearly than the content itself, coloring our interpretation of the news over time.\nEven worse, headlines are often written to encourage clicks, not to convey critical information. When headline-writing is driven by sensationalism, it\u2019s much, much easier to build a pattern of misinformation. Take this CBS News headline: \u201cDonald Trump: \u2018Millions\u2019 voted illegally for Hillary Clinton.\u201d The headline makes no indication that this an objectively false statement; instead, this word choice subtly suggestions that millions did, in fact, illegally vote for Hillary Clinton.\nHeadlines like this are what make lying a worthwhile political strategy. https://t.co/DRjGeYVKmW\u2014 Binyamin Appelbaum (@BCAppelbaum) November 27, 2016\n\nThis is a deeply dangerous choice of words when headlines are the primary way that news is conveyed\u2014especially on social media, where it\u2019s much faster to share than to actually read the article. In fact, according to a study from the Media Insight Project, \u201croughly six in 10 people acknowledge that they have done nothing more than read news headlines in the past week.\u201d \nIf a powerful person asserts X there are 2 responsible ways to cover:1. \u201cX is true\u201d2. \u201cPerson incorrectly thinks X\u201dNever \u201cPerson says X\u201d\u2014 Helen Rosner (@hels) November 27, 2016\n\nEven if we do, in fact, read the whole article, there\u2019s no guarantee that we\u2019re thinking critically about it. A study conducted by Stanford found that \u201c82 percent of students could not distinguish between a sponsored post and an actual news article on the same website. Nearly 70 percent of middle schoolers thought they had no reason to distrust a sponsored finance article written by the CEO of a bank, and many students evaluate the trustworthiness of tweets based on their level of detail and the size of attached photos.\u201d \nFriends: our information literacy is not very good. Luckily, we\u2014workers of the web\u2014are in a position to improve it.\nSentences into design\nConsider the presentation of those all-important headlines in social media cards, as on Facebook. The display is a combination of both the card\u2019s design and the article\u2019s source code, and looks something like this:\n\nA large image, a large headline; perhaps a brief description; and, at the bottom, in pale gray, a source and an author\u2019s name. \nThose choices convey certain values: specifically, they suggest that the headline and the picture are the entire point. The source is so deemphasized that it\u2019s easy to see how fake news gains a foothold: daily exposure to this kind of hierarchy has taught us that sources aren\u2019t important. \nAnd that\u2019s the message from the best-case scenario. Not every article shows every piece of data. Take this headline from the BBC: \u201cWisconsin receives request for vote recount.\u201d \n\nWith no image, no description, and no author, there\u2019s little opportunity to signal trust or provide nuance. There\u2019s also no date\u2014ever\u2014which presents potentially misleading complications, especially in the context of \u201cbreaking news.\u201d \nAnd lest you think dates don\u2019t matter in the light-speed era of social media, take the headline, \u201cMaryland sidesteps electoral college.\u201d Shared into my feed two days after the US presidential election, that\u2019s some serious news with major historical implications. But since there\u2019s no date on this card, there\u2019s no way for readers to know that the \u201cTuesday\u201d it refers to was in 2007. Again, a design choice has made misinformation far too contagious.\n\nMore recently, I posted my personal reaction to the death of Fidel Castro via a series of twenty tweets. Wanting to share my thoughts with friends and family who don\u2019t use Twitter, I then posted the first tweet to Facebook. The card it generated was less than ideal:\n\nThe information hierarchy created by this approach prioritizes the name of the Twitter user (not even the handle), along with the avatar. Not only does that create an awkward \u201cheadline\u201d (at least when you include a full stop in your name), but it also minimizes the content of the tweet itself\u2014which was the whole point. \nThe arbitrary elevation of some pieces of content over others\u2014like huge headlines juxtaposed with minimized sources\u2014teaches readers that these values are inherent to the content itself: that the headline is the news, that the source is irrelevant. We train readers to stop looking for the information we don\u2019t put in front of them. \nThese aren\u2019t life-or-death scenarios; they are just cases where design decisions noticeably dictate the perception of information. Not every design decision makes so obvious an impact, but the impact is there. Every single action adds to the pattern.\nDesign with intention\nWe can\u2019t necessarily teach people to read critically or vet their sources or stop believing conspiracy theories (or start believing facts). Our reach is limited to our roles: we make websites and products for companies and colleges and startups.\nBut we have more reach there than we might realize. Every decision we make influences how information is presented in the world. Every presentation adds to the pattern. No matter how innocuous our organization, how lowly our title, how small our user base\u2014every single one of us contributes, a little bit, to the way information is perceived.\nAre we changing it for the better?\nWhile it\u2019s always been crucial to act ethically in the building of the web, our cultural climate now requires dedicated, individual conscientiousness. It\u2019s not enough to think ourselves neutral, to dismiss our work as meaningless or apolitical. Everything is political. Every action, and every inaction, has an impact.\nAs Chappell Ellison put it much more eloquently than I can:\nEvery single action and decision a designer commits is a political act. The question is, are you a conscious actor?\u2014 Chappell Ellison\ud83e\udd14 (@ChappellTracker) November 28, 2016\n\nAs shapers of information, we have a responsibility: to create clarity, to further understanding, to advance truth. Every single one of us must choose to treat information\u2014and the society it builds\u2014with integrity.", "year": "2016", "author": "Lisa Maria Martin", "author_slug": "lisamariamartin", "published": "2016-12-14T00:00:00+00:00", "url": "https://24ways.org/2016/information-literacy-is-a-design-problem/", "topic": "content"} {"rowid": 115, "title": "Charm Clients, Win Pitches", "contents": "Over the years I have picked up a number of sales techniques that have lead to us doing pretty well in the pitches we go for. Of course, up until now, these top secret practices have remained firmly locked in the company vault but now I am going to share them with you. They are cunningly hidden within the following paragraphs so I\u2019m afraid you\u2019re going to have to read the whole thing.\n\nOk, so where to start? I guess a good place would be getting invited to pitch for work in the first place.\n\nShameless self promotion\n\nWhat not to do\n\nYou\u2019re as keen as mustard to \u2018sell\u2019 what you do, but you have no idea as to the right approach. From personal experience (sometimes bitter!), the following methods are as useful as the proverbial chocolate teapot:\n\n\n\tCold calling\n\tAdvertising\n\tBidding websites\n\tSales people\n\tNetworking events\n\n\nOk, I\u2019m exaggerating; sometimes these things work. For example, cold calling can work if you have a story \u2013 a reason to call and introduce yourself other than \u201cwe do web design and you have a website\u201d. \u201cWe do web design and we\u2019ve just moved in next door to you\u201d would be fine. \n\nAdvertising can work if your offering is highly specialist. However, paying oodles of dollars a day to Google Ads to appear under the search term \u2018web design\u2019 is probably not the best use of your budget. \n\nSpecialising is, in fact, probably a good way to go. Though it can feel counter intuitive in that you are not spreading yourself as widely as you might, you will eventually become an expert and therefore gain a reputation in your field. Specialism doesn\u2019t necessarily have to be in a particular skillset or technology, it could just as easily be in a particular supply chain or across a market.\n\nTarget audience\n\n\u2018Who to target?\u2019 is the next question. If you\u2019re starting out then do tap-up your family and friends. Anything that comes your way from them will almost certainly come with a strong recommendation. Also, there\u2019s nothing wrong with calling clients you had dealings with in previous employment (though beware of any contractual terms that may prevent this). You are informing your previous clients that your situation has changed; leave it up to them to make any move towards working with you. After all, you\u2019re simply asking to be included on the list of agencies invited to tender for any new work.\n\nLook to target clients similar to those you have worked with previously. Again, you have a story \u2013 hopefully a good one!\n\nSo how do you reach these people?\n\n\n\tMailing lists\n\tForums\n\tWriting articles\n\tConferences / Meetups\n\tSpeaking opportunities\n\tSharing Expertise\n\n\nIn essence: blog, chat, talk, enthuse, show off (a little)\u2026 share.\n\nThere are many ways you can do this. There\u2019s the traditional portfolio, almost obligatory blog (regularly updated of course), podcast, \u2018giveaways\u2019 like Wordpress templates, CSS galleries and testimonials. Testimonials are your greatest friend. Always ask clients for quotes (write them and ask for their permission to use) and even better, film them talking about how great you are.\n\nFinally, social networking sites can offer a way to reach your target audiences. You do have to be careful here though. You are looking to build a reputation by contributing value. Do not self promote or spam!\n\nWriting proposals\n\nIs it worth it?\n\nOk, so you have been invited to respond to a tender or brief in the form of a proposal. Good proposals take time to put together so you need to be sure that you are not wasting your time. There are two fundamental questions that you need to ask prior to getting started on your proposal:\n\n\n\tCan I deliver within the client\u2019s timescales?\n\tDoes the client\u2019s budget match my price?\n\n\nThe timescales that clients set are often plucked from the air and a little explanation about how long projects usually take can be enough to change expectations with regard to delivery. However, if a deadline is set in stone ask yourself if you can realistically meet it. Agreeing to a deadline that you know you cannot meet just to win a project is a recipe for an unhappy client, no chance of repeat business and no chance of any recommendations to other potential clients.\n\nPrice is another thing altogether. So why do we need to know?\n\nThe first reason, and most honest reason, is that we don\u2019t want to do a lot of unpaid pitch work when there is no chance that our price will be accepted. Who would? But this goes both ways \u2013 the client\u2019s time is also being wasted. It may only be the time to read the proposal and reject it, but what if all the bids are too expensive? Then the client needs to go through the whole process again.\n\nThe second reason why we need to know budgets relates to what we would like to include in a proposal over what we need to include. For example, take usability testing. We always highly recommend that a client pays for at least one round of usability testing because it will definitely improve their new site \u2013 no question. But, not doing it doesn\u2019t mean they\u2019ll end up with an unusable turkey. It\u2019s just more likely that any usability issues will crop up after launch.\n\nI have found that the best way to discover a budget is to simply provide a ballpark total, usually accompanied by a list of \u2018likely tasks for this type of project\u2019, in an initial email or telephone response. Expect a lot of people to dismiss you out of hand. This is good. Don\u2019t be tempted to \u2018just go for it\u2019 anyway because you like the client or work is short \u2013 you will regret it.\n\nOthers will say that the ballpark is ok. This is not as good as getting into a proper discussion about what priorities they might have but it does mean that you are not wasting your time and you do have a chance of winning the work. The only real risk with this approach is that you misinterpret the requirements and produce an inaccurate ballpark.\n\nFinally, there is a less confrontational approach that I sometimes use that involves modular pricing. We break down our pricing into quite detailed tasks for all proposals but when I really do not have a clue about a client\u2019s budget, I will often separate pricing into \u2018core\u2019 items and \u2018optional\u2019 items. This has proved to be a very effective method of presenting price.\n\nWhat to include\n\nSo, what should go into a proposal? It does depend on the size of the piece of work. If it\u2019s a quick update for an existing client then they don\u2019t want to read through all your blurb about why they should choose to work with you \u2013 a simple email will suffice.\n\nBut, for a potential new client I would look to include the following:\n\n\n\tYour suitability\n\tSummary of tasks\n\tTimescales\n\tProject management methodology\n\tPricing\n\tTesting methodology\n\tHosting options\n\tTechnologies\n\tImagery\n\tReferences\n\tFinancial information\n\tBiographies\n\n\nHowever, probably the most important aspect of any proposal is that you respond fully to the brief. In other words, don\u2019t ignore the bits that either don\u2019t make sense to you or you think irrelevant. If something is questionable, cover it and explain why you don\u2019t think it is something that warrants inclusion in the project.\n\nShould you provide speculative designs? If the brief doesn\u2019t ask for any, then certainly not. If it does, then speak to the client about why you don\u2019t like to do speculative designs. Explain that any designs included as part of a proposal are created to impress the client and not the website\u2019s target audience. Producing good web design is a partnership between client and agency. This can often impress and promote you as a professional. However, if they insist then you need to make a decision because not delivering any mock-ups will mean that all your other work will be a waste of time.\n\nWalking away\n\nAs I have already mentioned, all of this takes a lot of work. So, when should you be prepared to walk away from a potential job? I have already covered unrealistic deadlines and insufficient budget but there are a couple of other reasons. Firstly, would this new client damage your reputation, particularly within current sectors you are working in? Secondly, can you work with this client? A difficult client will almost certainly lead to a loss-making project.\n\nPerfect pitch\n\nRequirements\n\nIf the original brief didn\u2019t spell out what is expected of you at a presentation then make sure you ask beforehand. The critical element is how much time you have. It seems that panels are providing less and less time these days.\n\nThe usual formula is that you get an hour; half of which should be a presentation of your ideas followed by 30 minutes of questions. This isn\u2019t that much time, particularly for a big project that covers all aspect of web design and production. Don\u2019t be afraid to ask for more time, though it is very rare that you will be granted any.\n\nAsk if there any areas that a) they particularly want you to cover and b) if there are any areas of your proposal that were weak.\n\nAsk who will be attending. The main reason for this is to see if the decision maker(s) will be present but it\u2019s also good to know if you\u2019re presenting to 3 or 30 people.\n\nWho should be there\n\nGenerally speaking, I think two is the ideal number. Though I have done many presentations on my own, I always feel having two people to bounce ideas around with and have a bit of banter with, works well. You are not only trying to sell your ideas and expertise but also yourselves. One of the main things in the panels minds will be \u2013 \u201ccan I work with these people?\u201d\n\nHaving more than two people at a presentation often looks like you\u2019re wheeling people out just to demonstrate that they exist.\n\nWhat makes a client want to hire you?\n\nIn a nutshell: Confidence, Personality, Enthusiasm.\n\nYou can impart confidence by being well prepared and professional, providing examples and demonstrations and talking about your processes. You may find project management boring but pretty much every potential client will want to feel reassured that you manage your projects effectively.\n\nAs well as demonstrating that you know what you\u2019re talking about, it is important to encourage, and be part of, discussion about the project. Be prepared to suggest and challenge and be willing to say \u201cI don\u2019t know\u201d.\n\nAlso, no-one likes a show-off so don\u2019t over promote yourself; encourage them to contact your existing clients.\n\nWhat makes a client like you?\n\nEngaging with a potential client is tricky and it\u2019s probably the area where you need to be most on your toes and try to gauge the reaction of the client. We recommend the following:\n\n\n\tEncourage questions throughout\n\tAsk if you make sense \u2013 which encourages questions if you\u2019re not getting any\n\tHumour \u2013 though don\u2019t keep trying to be funny if you\u2019re not getting any laughs!\n\tBe willing to go off track\n\tRead your audience\n\tEmpathise with the process \u2013 chances are, most of the people in front of you would rather be doing something else\n\tThink about what you wear \u2013 this sounds daft but do you want to be seen as either the \u2018stiff in the suit\u2019 or the \u2018scruffy art student\u2019? Chances are neither character would get hired.\n\n\nDifferentiation\n\nSometimes, especially if you think you are an outsider, it\u2019s worth taking a few risks. I remember my colleague Paul starting off a presentation once with the line (backed up on screen) \u2013 \u201cHeadscape is not a usability consultancy\u201d. This was in response to the clients request to engage a usability consultancy. The thrust of Paul\u2019s argument was that we are a lot more than that.\n\nThis really worked. We were the outside choice but they ended up hiring us. Basically, this differentiated us from the crowd. It showed that we are prepared to take risks and think, dare I say it, outside of the box.\n\nDealing with difficult characters \n\nHow you react to tricky questioning is likely to be what determines whether you have a good or bad presentation. Here are a few of those characters that so often turn up in panels:\n\nThe techie \u2013 this is likely to be the situation where you need to say \u201cI don\u2019t know\u201d. Don\u2019t bluff as you are likely to dig yourself a great big embarrassment-filled hole. Promise to follow up with more information and make sure that you do so as quickly as possible after the pitch. \n\nThe \u2018hard man\u2019 MD \u2013 this the guy who thinks it is his duty to throw \u2018curve ball\u2019 questions to see how you react. Focus on your track record (big name clients will impress this guy) and emphasise your processes.\n\nThe \u2018no clue\u2019 client \u2013 you need to take control and be the expert though you do need to explain the reasoning behind any suggestions you make. This person will be judging you on how much you are prepared to help them deliver the project.\n\nThe price negotiator \u2013 be prepared to discuss price but do not reduce your rate or the effort associated with your proposal. Fall back on modular pricing and try to reduce scope to come within budget. You may wish to offer a one-off discount to win a new piece of work but don\u2019t get into detail at the pitch.\n\nDon\u2019t panic\u2026\n\nIf you go into a presentation thinking \u2018we must win this\u2019 then, chances are, you won\u2019t. Relax and be yourself. If you\u2019re not hitting it off with the panel then so be it. You have to remember that quite often you will be making up the numbers in a tendering process. This is massively frustrating but, unfortunately, part of it. If it\u2019s not going well, concentrate on what you are offering and try to demonstrate your professionalism rather than your personality. Finally, be on your toes, watch people\u2019s reactions and pay attention to what they say and try to react accordingly.\n\nSo where are the secret techniques I hear you ask? Well, using the words \u2018secret\u2019 and \u2018technique\u2019 was probably a bit naughty. Most of this stuff is about being keen, using your brain and believing in yourself and what you are selling rather than following a strict set of rules.", "year": "2008", "author": "Marcus Lillington", "author_slug": "marcuslillington", "published": "2008-12-09T00:00:00+00:00", "url": "https://24ways.org/2008/charm-clients-win-pitches/", "topic": "business"} {"rowid": 6, "title": "Run Ragged", "contents": "You care about typography, right? Do you care about words and how they look, read, and are understood? If you pick up a book or magazine, you notice the moment something is out of place: an orphan, rivers within paragraphs of justified prose, or caps masquerading as small caps. So why, I ask you, is your stance any different on the web?\n\nWe\u2019re told time and time again that as a person who makes websites we have to get comfortable with our lack of control. On the web, this is a feature, not a bug. But that doesn\u2019t mean we have to lower our standards, or not strive for the same amount of typographic craft of our print-based cousins. We shouldn\u2019t leave good typesetting at the door because we can\u2019t control the line length.\n\nWhen I typeset books, I\u2019d spend hours manipulating the text to create a pleasurable flow from line to line. A key aspect of this is manicuring the right rag \u2014 the vertical line of words on ranged-left text. Maximising the space available, but ensuring there are no line breaks or orphaned words that disrupt the flow of reading. Setting a right rag relies on a bunch of guidelines \u2014 or as I was first taught to call them, violations! \n\nViolation 1. Never break a line immediately following a preposition\n\nPrepositions are important, frequently used words in English. They link nouns, pronouns and other words together in a sentence. And links should not be broken if you can help it. Ending a line on a preposition breaks the join from one word to another and forces the reader to work harder joining two words over two lines.\n\nFor example: \n\n\n\tThe container is for the butter\n\n\nThe preposition here is for and shows the relationship between the butter and the container. If this were typeset on a line and the line break was after the word for, then the reader would have to carry that through to the next line. The sentence would not flow.\n\nThere are lots of prepositions in English \u2013 about 150 \u2013 but only 70 or so in use.\n\nViolation 2. Never break a line immediately following a dash\n\nA dash \u2014 either an em-dash or en-dash \u2014 can be used as a pause in the reading, or as used here, a point at which you introduce something that is not within the flow of the sentence. Like an aside. Ending with a pause on the end of the line would have the same effect as ending on a preposition. It disrupts the flow of reading.\n\nViolation 3. No small words at the end of a line\n\nDon\u2019t end a line with small words. Most of these will actually be covered by violation \u21161. But there will be exceptions. My general rule of thumb here is not to leave words of two or three letters at the end of a line.\n\nViolation 4. Hyphenation\n\nIn print, hyphens are used at the end of lines to join words broken over a line break. Mostly, this is used in justified body text, and no doubt you will be used to seeing it in newspapers or novels. A good rule of thumb is to not allow more than two consecutive lines to end with a hyphen.\n\nOn the web, of course, we can use the CSS hyphens property. It\u2019s reasonably supported with the exception of Chrome. Of course, it works best when combined with justified text to retain the neat right margin.\n\nViolation 5. Don\u2019t break emphasised phrases of three or fewer words\n\nIf you have a few words emphasised, for example:\n\n\n\tHe calls this problem definition escalation\n\n\n\u2026then try not to break the line among them. It\u2019s important the reader reads through all the words as a group.\n\nHow do we do all of that on the web?\n\nAll of those guidelines are relatively easy to implement in print. But what about the web? Where content is poured into a template from a CMS? Well, there are things we can do. Meet your new friend, the non-breaking space, or as you may know them: \u00a0.\n\nThe guidelines above are all based on one decision for the typesetter: when should the line break? \n\nWe can simply run through a body of text and add the \u00a0 based on these sets of questions:\n\n\n\tAre there any prepositions in the text? If so, add a \u00a0 after them.\n\tAre there any dashes? If so, add a \u00a0 after them.\n\tAre there any words of fewer than three characters that you haven\u2019t already added spaces to? If so, add a \u00a0 after them.\n\tAre there any emphasised groups of words either two or three words long? If so, add a \u00a0 in between them.\n\n\nFor a short piece of text, this isn\u2019t a big problem. But for longer bodies of text, this is a bit arduous. Also, as I said, lots of websites use a CMS and just dump the text into a template. What then? We can\u2019t expect our content creators to manually manicure a right rag based on these guidelines. In this instance, we really need things to be automatic.\n\nThere isn\u2019t any reason why we can\u2019t just pass the question of when to break the line straight to the browser by way of a script which compares the text against a set of rules. In plain English, this script could be to scan the text for:\n\n\n\tPrepositions. If found, add \u00a0 after them.\n\tDashes. If found, add \u00a0 after them.\n\tWords fewer than three characters long that aren\u2019t prepositions. If found, add \u00a0 after them.\n\tEmphasised phrases of up to three words in length. If found, add \u00a0 between all of the words.\n\n\nAnd there we have it.\n\nA note on fluidity\n\nAn important consideration of this script is that it doesn\u2019t scan the text to see what is at the end of a line. It just looks for prepositions, dashes, words fewer than three characters long, and emphasised words within paragraphs and applies the \u00a0 accordingly regardless of where the thing lives. This is because in a fluid layout a word might appear in the beginning, middle or the end of a line depending on the width of the browser. And we want it to behave in the right way when it does find itself at the end.\n\nSee it in action!\n\nMy friend and colleague, Nathan Ford, has written a small JavaScript called Ragadjust that does all of this automatically. The script loops through a webpage, compares the text against the conditions, and then inserts \u00a0 in the places that violate the conditions above.\n\nYou can get the script from GitHub and see it in action on my own website.\n\nSome caveats\n\nAs my friend Jon Tan says, \u201cThere are no rules in typography, just good or bad decisions\u201d, and typesetting the right rag is no different. \n\n\n\tThe guidelines for the violations above are useful for justified text, too. But we need to be careful here. Too stringent adherence to these violations could lead to ugly gaps in our words \u2014 called rivers \u2014 as the browser forces justification.\n\tThe violation regarding short words at the end of sentences is useful for longer line lengths, or measures, of text. When the measure gets shorter, maybe five or six words, then we need to be more forgiving as to what wraps to the next line and what doesn\u2019t. In fact, you can see this happening on my site where I\u2019ve not included a check on the size of the browser window (purposefully, for this demo, of course. Ahem).\n\tThis article is about applying these guidelines to English. Some of them will, no doubt, cross over to other languages quite well. But for those languages, like German for instance, where longer words tend to be in more frequent use, then some of the rules may result in a poor right rag.\n\n\nMarginal gains\n\nIn 2007, I spoke with Richard Rutter at SXSW on web typography. In that talk, Richard and I made a point that good typographic design \u2014 on the web, in print; anywhere, in fact \u2014 relies on small, measurable improvements across an entire body of work. From heading hierarchy to your grid system, every little bit helps. In and of themselves, these little things don\u2019t really mean that much. You may well have read this article, shrugged your shoulders and thought, \u201cHuh. So what?\u201d But these little things, when added up, make a difference. A difference between good typographic design and great typographic design.\n\n \n\nAppendix\n\nPreposition whitelist\n\naboard\nabout\nabove\nacross\nafter\nagainst\nalong\namid\namong\nanti\naround\nas\nat\nbefore\nbehind\nbelow\nbeneath\nbeside\nbesides\nbetween\nbeyond\nbut\nby\nconcerning\nconsidering\ndespite\ndown\nduring\nexcept\nexcepting\nexcluding\nfollowing\nfor\nfrom\nin\ninside\ninto\nlike\nminus\nnear\nof\noff\non\nonto\nopposite\noutside\nover\npast\nper\nplus\nregarding\nround\nsave\nsince\nthan\nthrough\nto\ntoward\ntowards\nunder\nunderneath\nunlike\nuntil\nup\nupon\nversus\nvia\nwith\nwithin\nwithout", "year": "2013", "author": "Mark Boulton", "author_slug": "markboulton", "published": "2013-12-24T00:00:00+00:00", "url": "https://24ways.org/2013/run-ragged/", "topic": "design"} {"rowid": 102, "title": "Art Directing with Looking Room", "contents": "Using photographic composition techniques to start to art direct on the template-driven web.\n\nThink back to last night. There you are, settled down in front of the TV, watching your favourite soap opera, with nice hot cup of tea in hand. Did you notice \u2013 whilst engrossed in the latest love-triangle \u2013 that the cameraman has worked very hard to support your eye\u2019s natural movement on-screen? He\u2019s carefully framed individual shots to create balance.\n\nThink back to last week. There you were, sat with your mates watching the big match. Did you notice that the cameraman frames the shot to go with the direction of play? A player moving right will always be framed so that he is on the far left, with plenty of \u2018room\u2019 to run into.\n\nBoth of these cameramen use a technique called Looking Room, sometimes called Lead Room. Looking Room is the space between the subject (be it a football, or a face), and the edge of the screen. Specifically, Looking Room is the negative space on the side the subject is looking or moving. The great thing is, it\u2019s not just limited to photography, film or television; we can use it in web design too.\n\nBasic Framing\n\nBefore we get into Looking Room, and how it applies to web, we need to have a look at some basics of photographic composition.\n\nMany web sites use imagery, or photographs, to enhance the content. But even with professionally shot photographs, without a basic understanding of framing or composition, you can damage how the image is perceived. \n\nA simple, easy way to make photographs more interesting is to fill the frame. \n\nTake this rather mundane photograph of a horse:\n\n\n\nA typical point and click affair. But, we can work with this.\n\nBy closely cropping, and filling the frame, we can instantly change the mood of the shot.\n\n\n\nI\u2019ve also added Looking Room on the right of the horse. This is space that the horse would be walking into. It gives the photograph movement.\n\nSubject, Space, and Movement\n\nGenerally speaking, a portrait photograph will have a subject and space around them. Visual interest in portrait photography can come from movement; how the eye moves around the shot. To get the eye moving, the photographer modifies the space around the subject.\n\nLook at this portrait:\n\n\n\nThe photography has framed the subject on the right, allowing for whitespace, or Looking Room, in the direction the subject is looking. The framing of the subject (1), with the space to the left (2) \u2013 the Looking Room \u2013 creates movement, shown by the arrow (3).\n\n\n\nNote the subject is not framed centrally (shown by the lighter dotted line).\n\nIf the photographer had framed the subject with equal space either side, the resulting composition is static, like our horse.\n\n\n\nIf the photographer framed the subject way over on the left, as she is looking that way, the resulting whitespace on the right leads a very uncomfortable composition.\n\n\n\nThe root of this discomfort is what the framing is telling our eye to do. The subject, looking to the left, suggests to us that we should do the same. However, the Looking Room on the right is telling our eye to occupy this space. The result is a confusing back and forth.\n\nHow Looking Room applies to the web\n\nWe can apply the same theory to laying out a web page or application. Taking the three same elements \u2013 Subject, Space, and resulting Movement \u2013 we can guide a user\u2019s eye to the elements we need to. As designers, or content editors, framing photographs correctly can have a subtle but important effect on how a page is visually scanned. Take this example:\n\n\n\nThe BBC homepage uses great photography as a way of promoting content. Here, they have cropped the main photograph to guide the user\u2019s eye into the content. \n\nBy applying the same theory, the designer or content editor has applied considerable Looking Room (2) to the photograph to create balance with the overall page design, but also to create movement of the user\u2019s eye toward the content (1)\n\n\n\nIf the image was flipped horizontally. The Looking Room is now on the right. The subject of the photograph is looking off the page, drawing the user\u2019s eye away from the content. Once again, this results in a confusing back and forth as your eye fights its way over to the left of the page.\n\n\n\nA little bit of Art Direction\n\nArt Direction can be described as the act or process of managing the visual presentation of content. Art Direction is difficult to do on the web, because content and presentation are, more often than not, separated. But where there are images, and when we know the templates that those images will populate, we can go a little way to bridging the gap between content and presentation.\n\nBy understanding the value of framing and Looking Room, and the fact that it extends beyond just a good looking photograph, we can start to see photography playing more of an integral role in the communication of content. \n\nWe won\u2019t just be populating templates. We\u2019ll be art directing.\n\nPhoto credits: \n\n\n\tPortrait by Carsten Tolkmit\n\tHorse by Mike Pedroncelli", "year": "2008", "author": "Mark Boulton", "author_slug": "markboulton", "published": "2008-12-05T00:00:00+00:00", "url": "https://24ways.org/2008/art-directing-with-looking-room/", "topic": "design"} {"rowid": 148, "title": "Typesetting Tables", "contents": "Tables have suffered in recent years on the web. They were used for laying out web pages. Then, following the Web Standards movement, they\u2019ve been renamed by the populous as `data tables\u2019 to ensure that we all know what they\u2019re for. There have been some great tutorials for the designing tables using CSS for presentation and focussing on the semantics in the displaying of data in the correct way. However, typesetting tables is a subtle craft that has hardly had a mention.\n\nTable design can often end up being a technical exercise. What data do we need to display? Where is the data coming from and what form will it take? When was the last time your heard someone talk about lining numerals? Or designing to the reading direction?\n\nTables are not read like sentences\n\nWhen a reader looks at, and tries to understand, tabular data, they\u2019re doing a bunch of things at the same time.\n\n\n\tGenerally, they\u2019re task based; they\u2019re looking for something.\n\tThey are reading horizontally AND vertically\n\n\nReading a table is not like reading a paragraph in a novel, and therefore shouldn\u2019t be typeset in the same way. Designing tables is information design, it\u2019s functional typography\u2014it\u2019s not a time for eye candy.\n\nTypesetting tables\n\nTypesetting great looking tables is largely an exercise in restraint. Minimal interference with the legibility of the table should be in the forefront of any designers mind.\n\nWhen I\u2019m designing tables I apply some simple rules:\n\n\n\tPlenty of negative space\n\tUse the right typeface\n\tGo easy on the background tones, unless you\u2019re giving reading direction visual emphasis\n\tDesign to the reading direction\n\n\nBy way of explanation, here are those rules as applied to the following badly typeset table.\n\nYour default table\n\nThis table is a mess. There is no consideration for the person trying to read it. Everything is too tight. The typeface is wrong. It\u2019s flat. A grim table indeed.\n\n\n\nLet\u2019s see what we can do about that.\n\nPlenty of negative space\n\nThe badly typeset table has been set with default padding. There has been little consideration for the ascenders and descenders in the type interfering with the many horizontal rules.\n\nThe first thing we do is remove most of the lines, or rules. You don\u2019t need them \u2013 the data in the rows forms its own visual rules. Now, with most of the rules removed, the ones that remain mean something; they are indicating some kind of hierarchy to the help the reader understand what the different table elements mean \u2013 in this case the column headings.\n\n\n\nNow we need to give the columns and rows more negative space. Note the framing of the column headings. I\u2019m giving them more room at the bottom. This negative space is active\u2014it\u2019s empty for a reason. The extra air in here also gives more hierarchy to the column headings.\n\n\n\nUse the right typeface\n\nThe default table is set in a serif typeface. This isn\u2019t ideal for a couple of reasons. This serif typeface has a standard set of text numerals. These dip below the baseline and are designed for using figures within text, not on their own. What you need to use is a typeface with lining numerals. These align to the baseline and are more legible when used for tables.\n\n\n\nSans serif typefaces generally have lining numerals. They are also arguably more legible when used in tables.\n\nGo easy on the background tones, unless you\u2019re giving reading direction visual emphasis \n\nWe\u2019ve all seen background tones on tables. They have their use, but my feeling is that use should be functional and not decorative.\n\nIf you have a table that is long, but only a few columns wide, then alternate row shading isn\u2019t that useful for showing the different lines of data. It\u2019s a common misconception that alternate row shading is to increase legibility on long tables. That\u2019s not the case. Shaded rows are to aid horizontal reading across multiple table columns. On wide tables they are incredibly useful for helping the reader find what they want.\n\n\n\nBackground tone can also be used to give emphasis to the reading direction. If we want to emphasis a column, that can be given a background tone.\n\n\n\nHierarchy\n\nAs I said earlier, people may be reading a table vertically, and horizontally in order to find what they want. Sometimes, especially if the table is complex, we need to give them a helping hand.\n\nVisually emphasising the hierarchy in tables can help the reader scan the data. Column headings are particularly important. Column headings are often what a reader will go to first, so we need to help them understand that the column headings are different to the stuff beneath them, and we also need to give them more visual importance. We can do this by making them bold, giving them ample negative space, or by including a thick rule above them. We can also give the row titles the same level of emphasis.\n\n\n\nIn addition to background tones, you can give emphasis to reading direction by typesetting those elements in bold. You shouldn\u2019t use italics\u2014with sans serif typefaces the difference is too subtle.\n\nSo, there you have it. A couple of simple guidelines to make your tables cleaner and more readable.", "year": "2007", "author": "Mark Boulton", "author_slug": "markboulton", "published": "2007-12-07T00:00:00+00:00", "url": "https://24ways.org/2007/typesetting-tables/", "topic": "design"} {"rowid": 183, "title": "Designing For The Switch", "contents": "For a long time on the web, we\u2019ve been typographically spoilt. Yes, you heard me correctly. Think about it: our computers come with web fonts already installed; fonts that have been designed specifically to work well online and at small size; and fonts that we can be sure other people have too. \n\nYes, we\u2019ve been spoilt. We don\u2019t need to think about using Verdana, Arial, Georgia or Cambria. \n\nYet, for a long time now, designers have felt we needed more. We want to choose whatever typeface we feel necessary for our designs. We did bad things along the way in pursuit of this goal such as images for text. Smart people dreamt up tools to help us such as sIFR, or Cuf\u00f3n. Only fairly recently, @font-face is supported in most browsers. The floodgates are opening. It really is the dawn of a new typographic era on the web. And we must tread carefully. \n\nThe New Typesetters \n\nMany years ago, before the advent of desktop publishing, if you wanted words set in a particular typeface, you had to go to a Typesetter. A Typesetter, or Compositor, as they were sometimes called, was a person whose job it was to take the written word (in the form of a document or manuscript) and \u2018set\u2019 the type in the desired typeface. The designer would chose what typeface they wanted \u2013 and all the ligatures, underlines, italics and whatnot \u2013 and then scribble all over the manuscript so the typesetter could set the correct type. \n\nThen along came Desktop Publishing and every Tom, Dick and Harry could choose type on their computer and an entire link in the typographic chain was removed within just a few years. Well, that\u2019s progress I guess. That was until six months ago when Typesetting was reborn on the web in the guise of a font service: Typekit. \n\nTypekit \u2013 and services like Typekit such as Typotheque, Kernest and the upcoming Fontdeck \u2013 are typesetting services for the web. You supply them with your content, in the form of a webpage, and they provide you with some JavaScript to render that webpage in the typeface you\u2019ve specified simply by adding the font name in your CSS file. \n\nThanks to services like these, font foundries are now talking to create licensing structures to allow us to embed fonts into our web pages legally \u2013 which has always been a sticking point in the past. So, finally, us designers can get what we want: whatever typeface we want on the web. \n\nYes, but\u2026 there are hurdles. One of which is the subject of this article. \n\nThe differences between Web Fonts and other fonts \n\nWeb fonts are different to normal fonts. They differ in a whole bunch of ways, from loose letter spacing to larger x-heights. But perhaps the most notable practical difference is file size. Let\u2019s take a look at one of Typekit\u2019s latest additions from the FontFont library, Meta. \n\nMeta Roman weighs in at 42 KB. This is a fairly typical file size for a single weight of a good font. Now, let\u2019s have a look at Verdana. Verdana is 186 KB. For one weight. The four weight family for Verdana weighs in at 686 KB. Four weights for half a megabyte!? Why so huge? \n\nWell, Verdana has a lot of information packed into its 186 KB. It has the largest hinting data table of any typeface (the information carried by a font that tells it how to align itself to the pixels on your screen). As it has been shipped with Microsoft products since 1996, it has had time to grow to support many, many languages. Along with its cousin, Georgia (283 KB), Verdana was a new breed of typeface. And it\u2019s grown fat. \n\nIf really serious web typography takes off \u2013 and by that I mean typefaces specifically designed for the screen \u2013 then we\u2019re going to see more fonts increase in file size as the font files include more data. So, if you\u2019re embedding a font weighing in at 100 KB, what happens? \n\nThe Flash of Unstyled Text \n\nWe all remember the Flash of Unstyled Content bug on Internet Explorer, right? That annoying bug that caused a momentary flash of unstyled HTML page. Well, the same thing can happen with embedding fonts using @font-face. An effect called The Flash of Unstyled Text (FOUT), first coined by Paul Irish. Personally, I prefer to call it the Flash of UnTypeset Text (still FOUT), as the text is styled, just not with what you want. \n\nIf you embed a typeface in your CSS, then the browser will download that typeface. Typically, browsers differ in the way they handle this procedure. \n\nFirefox and Opera will render the text using the next font in your font stack until the first (embedded) font is loaded. It will then switch to the embedded font. \n\nWebkit takes the approach that you asked for that font so it will wait until it\u2019s completely loaded before showing it you. \n\nIn Opera and Firefox, you get a FOUT. In Webkit, you don\u2019t. You wait. \n\nHang on there. Didn\u2019t I say that good web fonts weigh in considerably more than \u2018normal\u2019 fonts? And whilst the browser is downloading the font, the user gets what to look at? Some pictures, background colours and whatever else isn\u2019t HTML? I believe Webkit\u2019s handling of font embedding \u2013 as deliberate as it is \u2013 is damaging to the practice of font embedding. Why? Well, we can design to a switch in typeface (as jarring as that is for the user), but we can\u2019t design to blank space. \n\nLet\u2019s have a closer look at how we can design to FOUT. \n\nMore considered font stacks \n\nWe all know that font stacks in CSS are there for when a user doesn\u2019t have a font; the browser will jump to the next one in the stack. Adding embedded fonts into the font stack means that because of FOUT (in gecko and Opera), the user can see a switch, and depending on their connection that switch could happen well into any reading that the user may be doing. \n\nThe practicalities of this are that a user could be reading and be towards the end of a line when the paragraph they are reading changes shape. The word they were digesting suddenly changes to three lines down. It\u2019s the online equivalent of someone turning the page for you when you least expect it. So, how can we think about our font stacks slightly differently so we can minimise the switch? \n\nTwo years ago, Richard Rutter wrote on this very site about increasing our font stacks. By increasing the font stacks (by using his handy matrix) we can begin to experiment with different typefaces. However, when we embed a typeface, we must look very carefully at the typefaces in the font stack and the relationship between them. Because, previously, the user would not see a switch from one typeface to another, they\u2019d just get either one or the other. Not both. With FOUT, the user sees two typefaces. \n\nBy carefully looking at the characteristics of the typefaces you choose, you can minimise the typographic \u2018distance\u2019 between the type down the stack. In doing so, you minimise the jarring effect of the switch. \n\nLet\u2019s take a look at an example of how to go about this. \n\nMicro Typography to build better font stacks \n\nLet\u2019s say I want to use a recent edition to Typekit \u2013 Meta Serif Book \u2013 as my embedded font. My font stack would start like this: \n\nfont-family: 'Meta Serif Bold'; \n\nWhere do you go from here? Well, first, familiarise yourself with Richard\u2019s Font Matrix so you get an idea of what fonts are available for different people. Then start by looking closely at the characters of the embedded font and then compare them to different fonts from the matrix. \n\nWhen I do this, I\u2019m looking to match type characteristics such as x-height, contrast (the thickness and thinness of strokes), the stress (the angle of contrast) and the shape of the serifs (if the typeface has any). \n\n\n\nUsing just these simple comparative metrics means you can get to a \u2018best fit\u2019 reasonably quickly. And remember, you\u2019re not after an ideal match. You\u2019re after a match that means the switch is less painful for the reader, but also a typeface that carries similar characteristics so your design doesn\u2019t change too much. \n\nBuilding upon my choice of embedded font, I can quickly build up a stack by comparing letters. \n\n\n\nThis then creates my \u2018best fit\u2019 stack. \n\n\n\nThis translates to the CSS as: \n\nfont-family: 'Meta Serif Bold', 'Lucida Bright', Cambria, Georgia, serif \n\nFollowing this process, and ending up with considered font stacks, means that we can design to the Flash of UnTypeset Content and ensure that our readers don\u2019t get a diminished experience.", "year": "2009", "author": "Mark Boulton", "author_slug": "markboulton", "published": "2009-12-16T00:00:00+00:00", "url": "https://24ways.org/2009/designing-for-the-switch/", "topic": "design"} {"rowid": 72, "title": "Designing with Contrast", "contents": "When an appetite for aesthetics over usability becomes the bellwether of user interface design, it\u2019s time to reconsider who we\u2019re designing for.\nOver the last few years, we have questioned the signifiers that gave obvious meaning to the function of interface elements. Strong textures, deep shadows, gradients \u2014 imitations of physical objects \u2014 were discarded. And many, rightfully so. Our audiences are now more comfortable with an experience that feels native to the technology, so we should respond in kind.\nYet not all of the changes have benefitted users. Our efforts to simplify brought with them a trend of ultra-minimalism where aesthetics have taken priority over legibility, accessibility and discoverability. The trend shows no sign of losing popularity \u2014 and it is harming our experience of digital content.\n\nA thin veneer\nWe are in a race to create the most subdued, understated interface. Visual contrast is out. In its place: the thinnest weights of a typeface and white text on bright color backgrounds. Headlines, text, borders, backgrounds, icons, form controls and inputs: all grey.\nWhile we can look back over the last decade and see minimalist trends emerging on the web, I think we can place a fair share of the responsibility for the recent shift in priorities on Apple. The release of iOS 7 ushered in a radical change to its user interface. It paired mobile interaction design to the simplicity and eloquence of Apple\u2019s marketing and product design. It was a catalyst. We took what we saw, copied and consumed the aesthetics like pick-and-mix.\nNew technology compounds this trend. Computer monitors and mobile devices are available with screens of unprecedented resolutions. Ultra-light type and subtle hues, difficult to view on older screens, are more legible on these devices. It would be disingenuous to say that designers have always worked on machines representative of their audience\u2019s circumstances, but the gap has never been as large as it is now. We are running the risk of designing VIP lounges where the cost of entry is a Mac with a Retina display.\nMinimalist expectations\nLike progressive enhancement in an age of JavaScript, many good and sensible accessibility practices are being overlooked or ignored. We\u2019re driving unilateral design decisions that threaten accessibility. We\u2019ve approached every problem with the same solution, grasping on to the integrity of beauty, focusing on expression over users\u2019 needs and content. \nSomeone once suggested to me that a client\u2019s website should include two states. The first state would be the ideal experience, with low color contrast, light font weights and no differentiation between links and text. It would be the default. The second state would be presented in whatever way was necessary to meet accessibility standards. Users would have to opt out of the default state via a toggle if it wasn\u2019t meeting their needs. A sort of first-class, upper deck cabin equivalent of graceful degradation. That this would divide the user base was irrelevant, as the aesthetics of the brand were absolute. \nIt may seem like an unusual anecdote, but it isn\u2019t uncommon to see this thinking in our industry. Again and again, we place the burden of responsibility to participate in a usable experience on others. We view accessibility and good design as mutually exclusive. Taking for granted what users will tolerate is usually the forte of monopolistic services, but increasingly we apply the same arrogance to our new products and services.\n\nImitation without representation\nAll of us are influenced in one way or another by one another\u2019s work. We are consciously and unconsciously affected by the visual and audible activity around us. This is important and unavoidable. We do not produce work in a vacuum. We respond to technology and culture. We channel language and geography. We absorb the sights and sounds of film, television, news. To mimic and copy is part and parcel of creating something an audience of many can comprehend and respond to. Our clients often look first to their competitors\u2019 products to understand their success.\nHowever, problems arise when we focus on style without context; form without function; mimicry as method. Copied and reused without any of the ethos of the original, stripped of deliberate and informed decision-making, the so-called look and feel becomes nothing more than paint on an empty facade.\nThe typographic and color choices so in vogue today with our popular digital products and services have little in common with the brands they are meant to represent.\n\nFor want of good design, the message was lost\nThe question to ask is: does the interface truly reflect the product? Is it an accurate characterization of the brand and organizational values? Does the delivery of the content match the tone of voice?\nThe answer is: probably not. Because every organization, every app or service, is unique. Each with its own personality, its own values and wonderful quirks. Design is communication. We should do everything in our role as professionals to use design to give voice to the message. Our job is to clearly communicate the benefits of a service and unreservedly allow access to information and content. To do otherwise, by obscuring with fashionable styles and elusive information architecture, does a great disservice to the people who chose to engage with and trust our products.\nWe can achieve hierarchy and visual rhythm without resorting to extreme reduction. We can craft a beautiful experience with fine detail and curiosity while meeting fundamental standards of accessibility (and strive to meet many more).\nStandards of excellence\nIt isn\u2019t always comfortable to step back and objectively question our design choices. We get lost in the flow of our work, using patterns and preferences we\u2019ve tried and tested before. That our decisions often seem like second nature is a gift of experience, but sometimes it prevents us from finding our blind spots.\nI was first caught out by my own biases a few years ago, when designing an interface for the Bank of England. After deciding on the colors for the typography and interactive elements, I learned that the site had to meet AAA accessibility standards. My choices quickly fell apart. It was eye-opening. I had to start again with restrictions and use size, weight and placement instead to construct the visual hierarchy.\nEven now, I make mistakes. On a recent project, I used large photographs on an organization\u2019s website to promote their products. Knowing that our team had control over the art direction, I felt confident that we could compose the photographs to work with text overlays. Despite our best effort, the cropped images weren\u2019t always consistent, undermining the text\u2019s legibility. If I had the chance to do it again, I would separate the text and image.\nSo, what practical things can we consider to give our users the experience they deserve?\nPut guidelines in place\n\nThink about your brand values. Write down keywords and use them as a framework when choosing a typeface. Explore colors that convey the organization\u2019s personality and emotional appeal.\nDefine a color palette that is web-ready and meets minimum accessibility standards. Note which colors are suitable for use with text. Only very dark hues of grey are consistently legible so keep them for non-essential text (for example, as placeholders in form inputs).\nFind which background colors you can safely use with white text, and consider integrating contrast checks into your workflow.\nUse roman and medium weights for body copy. Reserve lighter weights of a typeface for very large text. Thin fonts are usually the first to break down because of aliasing differences across platforms and screens.\nCheck that the size, leading and length of your type is always legible and readable. Define lower and upper limits. Small text is best left for captions and words in uppercase.\nAvoid overlaying text on images unless it\u2019s guaranteed to be legible. If it\u2019s necessary to optimize space in the layout, give the text a container. Scrims aren\u2019t always reliable: the text will inevitably overlap a part of the photograph without a contrasting ground.\n\nTest your work\n\nReview legibility and contrast on different devices. It\u2019s just as important as testing the layout of a responsive website. If you have a local device lab, pay it a visit.\nFind a computer monitor near a window when the sun is shining. Step outside the studio and try to read your content on a mobile device with different brightness levels. \nAsk your friends and family what they use at home and at work. It\u2019s one way of making sure your feedback isn\u2019t always coming from a closed loop.\n\nPush your limits\n\nYou define what the user sees. If you\u2019ve inherited brand guidelines, question them. If you don\u2019t agree with the choices, make the case for why they should change.\nExperiment with size, weight and color to find contrast. Objects with low contrast appear similar to one another and undermine the visual hierarchy. Weak relationships between figure and ground diminish visual interest. A balanced level of contrast removes ambiguity and creates focal points. It captures and holds our attention.\nIf you\u2019re lost for inspiration, look to graphic design in print. We have a wealth of history, full of examples that excel in using contrast to establish visual hierarchy.\nEmbrace limitations. Use boundaries as an opportunity to explore possibilities.\n\nMore than just a facade\nDesigning with standards encourages legibility and helps to define a strong visual hierarchy. Design without exclusion (through neither negligence or intent) gets around discussions of demographics, speaks to a larger audience and makes good business sense. Following the latest trends not only weakens usability but also hinders a cohesive and distinctive brand.\nUsers will make means when they need to, by increasing browser font sizes or enabling system features for accessibility. But we can do our part to take as much of that burden off of the user and ask less of those who need it most.\nIn architecture, it isn\u2019t buildings that mimic what is fashionable that stand the test of time. Nor do we admire buildings that tack on separate, poorly constructed extensions to meet a bare minimum of safety regulations. We admire architecture that offers well-considered, remarkable, usable spaces with universal access.\nPerhaps we can take inspiration from these spaces. Let\u2019s give our buildings a bold voice and make sure the doors are open to everyone.", "year": "2015", "author": "Mark Mitchell", "author_slug": "markmitchell", "published": "2015-12-13T00:00:00+00:00", "url": "https://24ways.org/2015/designing-with-contrast/", "topic": "design"} {"rowid": 143, "title": "Marking Up a Tag Cloud", "contents": "Everyone\u2019s doing it. \n\nThe problem is, everyone\u2019s doing it wrong. \n\nHarsh words, you might think. But the crimes against decent markup are legion in this area. You see, I\u2019m something of a markup and semantics junkie. So I\u2019m going to analyse some of the more well-known tag clouds on the internet, explain what\u2019s wrong, and then show you one way to do it better. \n\ndel.icio.us \n\nI think the first ever tag cloud I saw was on del.icio.us. Here\u2019s how they mark it up. \n\n
\n\nUnfortunately, that is one of the worst examples of tag cloud markup I have ever seen. The page states that a tag cloud is a list of tags where size reflects popularity. However, despite describing it in this way to the human readers, the page\u2019s author hasn\u2019t described it that way in the markup. It isn\u2019t a list of tags, just a bunch of anchors in a\n\t\u00a006\u00a0\n\t\u00a0africa\u00a0\n\t\u00a0amsterdam\u00a0\n\t...\n
\n\nAgain we have a simple collection of anchors like del.icio.us, only this time in a paragraph. But rather than using a class to represent the size of the tag they use an inline style. An inline style using a pixel-based font size. That\u2019s so far away from the goal of separating style from content, they might as well use a tag. You could theoretically parse that to extract the information, but you have more work to guess what the pixel sizes represent. Markup crime number two (and extra jail time for using non-breaking spaces purely for visual spacing purposes.)\n\nTechnorati \n\nAh, now. Here, you\u2019d expect something decent. After all, the Overlord of microformats and King of Semantics Tantek \u00c7elik works there. Surely we\u2019ll see something decent here? \n\nI wish Google could find my keys
\n\nCSS:\n\na:link:after,\na:visited:after,\na:hover:after,\na:active:after {\n\tcontent: \" <\" attr(href) \"> \";\n}\n\nBut this is not perfect, in the above example the content of the href is just naively plonked after the link text:\n\nI wish GoogleSeen ${s.count} times
\n