{"rowid": 312, "title": "Preparing to Be Badass Next Year", "contents": "Once we\u2019ve eaten our way through the holiday season, people will start to think about new year\u2019s resolutions. We tend to focus on things that we want to change\u2026 and often things that we don\u2019t like about ourselves to \u201cfix\u201d. We set rules for ourselves, or try to start new habits or stop bad ones. We focus in on things we will or won\u2019t do. \nFor many of us the list of things we \u201cought\u201d to be spending time on is just plain overwhelming \u2013 family, charity/community, career, money, health, relationships, personal development. \nIt\u2019s kinda scary even just listing it out, isn\u2019t it? I want to encourage you to think differently about next year.\nThe ever-brilliant Kathy Sierra articulates a better approach really well when talking about the attitude we should have to building great products. She tells us to think not about what the user will do with our product, but about what they are trying to achieve in the real world and how our product helps them to be badass1.\nWhen we help the user be badass, then we are really making a difference. \nI suppose this is one way of saying: focus not on what you will do, focus on what it will help you achieve. How will it help you be awesome?\nIn what ways do you want to be more badass next year?\nA professional lens\nThough of course you might want to focus in on health or family or charity or community or another area next year, many people will want to become more badass in their chosen career. \nSo let\u2019s talk about a scaffold to help you figure out your professional / career development next year. \nFirst up, an assumption: everyone wants to be awesome. Nobody gets up in the morning aiming to be crap at their job. Nobody thinks to themselves \u201cToday I am aiming for just south of mediocre, and if I can mess up everybody else\u2019s ability to do good work then that will be just perfect2\u201d. \nErgo, you want to be awesome. So what does awesome look like? \nDanger!\nThe big trap that people fall into when think about their professional development is to immediately focus on the things that they aren\u2019t good at. When you ask people \u201cwhat do you want to work on getting better at next year?\u201d they frequently gravitate to the things that they believe they are bad at. \nWhy is this a trap? Because if you focus all your time and energy on improving the areas that you suck at, you are going to end up middling at everything. Going from bad \u2192 mediocre at a given skill / behaviour takes a bunch of time and energy. So if you spend all your time going from bad \u2192 mediocre at things, what do you think you end up? That\u2019s right, mediocre. \nMediocrity is not a great career goal, kids. \nWhat do you already rock at?\nThe much better investment of time and energy is to go from good \u2192 awesome. It often takes the same amount of relative time and energy, but wow the end result is better! So first, ask yourself and those who know you well what you are already pretty damn good at. Combat imposter syndrome by asking others. \nThen figure out how to double down on those things. What does brilliant look like for a given skill? What\u2019s the knowledge or practice that you need to level yourself up even further in that thing?\nBut what if I really really suck?\nAdmittedly, sometimes something you suck at really is holding you back. But it\u2019s important to separate out weaknesses (just something you suck at) from controlling weaknesses (something you suck at that actually matters for your chosen career). \nIf skill x is just not an important thing for you to be good at, you may never need to care that you aren\u2019t good at it. If your current role or the one you aspire to next really really requires you to be great at x, then it\u2019s worth investing your time and energy (and possibly money too) getting better at it.\nSo when you look at the things that you aren\u2019t good at, which of those are actually essential for success?\nThe right ratio\nA good rule of thumb is to pick three things you are already good at to work on becoming awesome at and limit yourself to one weakness that you are trying to improve on. That way you are making sure that you get to awesome in areas where you already have an advantage, and limit the amount of time you are spending on going from bad \u2192 mediocre. \nLevelling up learning\nSo once you\u2019ve figured out your areas you want to focus on next year, what do you actually decide to do? \nMost of all, you should try to design your day-to-day work in a way that it is also an effective learning experience. This means making sure you have a good feedback loop \u2013 you get to try something, see if it works, learn from it, rinse and repeat. \nIt\u2019s also about balance: you want to be challenged enough for work to be interesting, without it being so hard it\u2019s frustrating. You want to do similar / the same things often enough that you get to learn and improve, without it being so repetitive that it\u2019s boring. \nContinuously getting better at things you are already good at is actually both easier and harder than it sounds. The advantage is that it\u2019s pretty easy to add the feedback loop to make sure that you are improving; the disadvantage is that you\u2019re already good at these skills so you could easily just \u201cdo\u201d without ever stopping to reflect and improve. Build in time for personal retrospectives (\u201cWhat went well? What didn\u2019t? What one thing will I choose to change next time?\u201d) and find a way of getting feedback from outside sources as well. \nAs for the new skills, it\u2019s worth knowing that skill development follows a particular pattern:\n\nWe all start out unconsciously incompetent (we don\u2019t know what to do and if we tried we\u2019d unwittingly get it wrong), progress on to conscious incompetence (we now know we\u2019re doing it wrong) then conscious competence (we\u2019re doing it right but wow it takes effort and attention) and eventually get to unconscious competence (automatically getting it right). \nYour past experiences and knowledge might let you move faster through these stages, but no one gets to skip them. Invest the time and remember you need the feedback loop to really improve. \nWhat about keeping up?\nEverything changes very fast in our industry. We need to invest in not falling behind, in keeping on top of what great looks like. There are a bunch of ways to do this, from reading blog posts, following links on Twitter, reading books to attending conferences or workshops, or just finding time to build things in new ways or with new technologies. \nWhich will work best for you depends on how you best learn. Do you prefer to swallow a book? Do you learn most by building or experimenting? \nWhatever your learning style though, remember that there are three real needs:\n\nScan the landscape (what\u2019s changing, does it matter)\nGain the knowledge or skills (get the detail)\nApply the knowledge or skills (use it in reality)\n\nWhen you remember that you need all three of these things it can help you get more of what you do. \nFor me personally, I use a combination of conferences and blogs / Twitter to scan the landscape. Half of what I want out of a conference is just a list of things to have on my radar that might become important. I then pick a couple of things to go read up on more (I personally learn most effectively by swallowing a book or spec or similar). And then I pick one thing at a time to actually apply in real life, to embed the skill / knowledge. \nIn summary\n\nAim to be awesome (mediocrity is not a career goal).\nFigure out what you already rock at.\nOnly care about stuff you suck at that matters for your career.\nPick three things to go from good \u2192 awesome and one thing to go from bad \u2192 mediocre (or mediocre \u2192 good) this year.\nDesign learning into your daily work.\nScan the landscape, learn new stuff, apply it for real. \nBe badass!\n\n\n\n\n\nShe wrote a whole book about it. You should read it: Badass: Making Users Awesome\u00a0\u21a9\n\n\nBefore you argue too vehemently: I suppose some antisocial sociopathic bastards do exist. Identify them, and then RUN AWAY FAST AS YOU CAN #realtalk\u00a0\u21a9", "year": "2016", "author": "Meri Williams", "author_slug": "meriwilliams", "published": "2016-12-22T00:00:00+00:00", "url": "https://24ways.org/2016/preparing-to-be-badass-next-year/", "topic": "business"} {"rowid": 289, "title": "Front-End Developers Are Information Architects Too", "contents": "The theme of this year\u2019s World IA Day was \u201cInformation Everywhere, Architects Everywhere\u201d. This article isn\u2019t about what you may consider an information architect to be: someone in the user-experience field, who maybe studied library science, and who talks about taxonomies. This is about a realisation I had a couple of years ago when I started to run an increasing amount of usability-testing sessions with people who have disabilities: that the structure, labelling, and connections that can be made in front-end code is information architecture. People\u2019s ability to be successful online is unequivocally connected to the quality of the code that is written.\nPlaces made of information\nIn information architecture we talk about creating places made of information. These places are made of ones and zeros, but we talk about them as physical structures. We talk about going onto a social media platform, posting in blogs, getting locked out of an environment, and building applications. In 2002, Andrew Hinton stated:\n\nPeople live and work in these structures, just as they live and work in their homes, offices, factories and malls. These places are not virtual: they are as real as our own minds.\n25 Theses\n\nWe\u2019re creating structures which people rely on for significant parts of their lives, so it\u2019s critical that we carry out our work responsibly. This means we must use our construction materials correctly. Luckily, our most important material, HTML, has a well-documented specification which tells us how to build robust and accessible places. What is most important, I believe, is to understand the semantics of HTML.\nSemantics\nThe word \u201csemantic\u201d has its origin in Greek words meaning \u201csignificant\u201d, \u201csignify\u201d, and \u201csign\u201d. In the physical world, a structure can have semantic qualities that tell us something about it. For example, the stunning Westminster Abbey inspires awe and signifies much about the intent and purpose of the structure. The building\u2019s size; the quality of the stone work; the massive, detailed stained glass: these are all signs that this is a building meant for something the creators deemed important. Alternatively consider a set of large, clean, well-positioned, well-lit doors on the ground floor of an office block: they don\u2019t need an \u201centrance\u201d sign to communicate their use and to stop people trying to use a nearby fire exit to get into the building. The design of the doors signify their usage. Sometimes a more literal and less awe-inspiring approach to communicating a building\u2019s purpose happens, but the affect is similar: the building is signifying something about its purpose.\nHTML has over 115 elements, many of which have semantics to signify structure and affordance to people, browsers, and assistive technology. The HTML 5.1 specification mentions semantics, stating:\n\nElements, attributes, and attribute values in HTML are defined \u2026 to have certain meanings (semantics). For example, the
    element represents an ordered list, and the lang attribute represents the language of the content.\nHTML 5.1 Semantics, structure, and APIs of HTML documents\n\nHTML\u2019s baked-in semantics means that developers can architect their code to signify structure, create relationships between elements, and label content so people can understand what they\u2019re interacting with. Structuring and labelling information to make it available, usable, and understandable to people is what an information architect does. It\u2019s also what a front-end developer does, whether they realise it or not.\nA brief introduction to information architecture\nWe\u2019re going to start by looking at what an information architect is. There are many definitions, and I\u2019m going to quote Richard Saul Wurman, who is widely regarded as the father of information architecture. In 1976 he said an information architect is:\n\nthe individual who organizes the patterns inherent in data, making the complex clear; a person who creates the structure or map of information which allows others to find their personal paths to knowledge; the emerging 21st century professional occupation addressing the needs of the age focused upon clarity, human understanding, and the science of the organization of information.\nOf Patterns And Structures\n\nTo me, this clearly defines any developer who creates code that a browser, or other user agent (for example, a screen reader), uses to create a structured, navigable place for people.\nJust as there are many definitions of what an information architect is, there are for information architecture itself. I\u2019m going to use the definition from the fourth edition of Information Architecture For The World Wide Web, in which the authors define it as:\nThe structural design of shared information environments.\nThe synthesis of organization, labeling, search, and navigation systems within digital, physical, and cross-channel ecosystems.\nThe art and science of shaping information products and experiences to support usability, findability, and understanding.\nInformation Architecture For The World Wide Web, 4th Edition\nTo me, this describes front-end development. Done properly, there is an art to creating robust, accessible, usable, and findable spaces that delight all our users. For example, at 2015\u2019s State Of The Browser conference, Edd Sowden talked about the accessibility of s. He discovered that by simply not using the semantically-correct
    element to mark up headings, in some situations browsers will decide that a
    is being used for layout and essentially make it invisible to assistive technology. Another example of how coding practices can affect the usability and findability of content is shown by L\u00e9onie Watson in her How ARIA landmark roles help screen reader users video. By using ARIA landmark roles, people who use screen readers are quickly able to identify and jump to common parts of a web page.\nOur definitions of information architects and information architecture mention patterns, rules, organisation, labelling, structure, and relationships. There are numerous different models for how these elements get boiled down to their fundamentals. In his Understanding Context book, Andrew Hinton calls them Labels, Relationships, and Rules; Jorge Arango calls them Links, Nodes, And Order; and Dan Klyn uses Ontology, Taxonomy, and Choreography, which is the one we\u2019re going to use. Dan defines these terms as:\nOntology\nThe definition and articulation of the rules and patterns that govern the meaning of what we intend to communicate.\nWhat we mean when we say what we say.\nTaxonomy\nThe arrangements of the parts. Developing systems and structures for what everything\u2019s called, where everything\u2019s sorted, and the relationships between labels and categories\nChoreography\nRules for interaction among the parts. The structures it creates foster specific types of movement and interaction; anticipating the way users and information want to flow and making affordance for change over time.\n\nWe now have definitions of an information architect, information architecture, and a model of the elements of information architecture. But is writing HTML really creating information or is it just wrangling data and metadata? When does data turn into information? In his book Managing For The Future Peter Drucker states:\n\n\u2026 data is not information. Information is data endowed with relevance and purpose.\nManaging For The Future\n\nIf we use the correct semantic element to mark up content then we\u2019re developing with purpose and creating relevance. For example, if we follow the advice of the HTML 5.1 specification and mark up headings using heading rank instead of the outline algorithm, we\u2019re creating a structure where the depth of one heading is relevant to the previous one. Architected correctly, an

    element should be relevant to its parent, which should be the

    . By following the HTML specification we can create a structured, searchable, labeled document that will hopefully be relevant to what our users need to be successful. If you\u2019ve never used a screen reader, you might be wondering how the headings on a page are searchable. Screen readers give users the ability to interact with headings in a couple of ways:\n\nby creating a list of headings so users can quickly scan the page for information\nby using a keyboard command to cycle through one heading at a time\n\nIf we had a document for Christmas Day TV we might structure it something like this:\n

    Christmas Day TV schedule

    \n

    BBC1

    \n

    Morning

    \n

    Evening

    \n

    BBC2

    \n

    Morning

    \n

    Evening

    \n

    ITV

    \n

    Morning

    \n

    Evening

    \n

    Channel 4

    \n

    Morning

    \n

    Evening

    \nIf I use VoiceOver to generate a list of headings, I get this:\n\nOnce I have that list I can use keyboard commands to filter the list based on the heading level. For example, I can press 2 to hear just the

    s:\n\nIf we hadn\u2019t used headings, of if we\u2019d nested them incorrectly, our users would be frustrated.\nPutting this together\nLet\u2019s put this together with an example of a button that, when pressed, toggles the appearance of a panel of links. There are numerous ways we could create a button on a web page, but the best way is to just use a \n\n
    \n \n
    \nThere\u2019s quite a bit going on here. We\u2019re using the:\n\naria-controls attribute to architect a connection between the