explaining web standards to clients

[Jeff Fritz]

I've started out by coding websites for myself - but eventually have
moved on to making websites as projects for people. Originally, when
doing personal websites, I had the leisure of taking my time and coding
however I wanted - however, when coding for someone else, they often
want things done a certain way.

It's hard explain to someone non technically-savvy about what's the
best way to code a website - they often want a feature that isn't
exactly in line with coding standards. So basically, you have to
explain to them in as simple terms as possible, the advantages of
coding according to web standards.

For example, take excessive javascript code - many clients or users
might want you to make a website that has some fancy flashing text or
needless image effects using javascript. It might work fine for your
user, who has a mainstream windows PC that runs these effects fine.

However, you need to make your user realize that not everyone's PC is
equal - and thus as a result, javascript in one person's browser
might completely bog down their computer's resources so much, that it
virtually renders it useless. In others, javascript might not even be
supported. So, any functionality of the site that relies on javascript
will be inaccessible by these users.

It's impossible to track down all of the combinations of users'
operating systems, computer speeds, and browser software, so it is best
just to stay away from javascript altogether. When making an
informational or commercial website, it's very important to take your
audience into consideration.

If you're making a vending site that sells computer parts, most likely
your audience will be computer savvy and may be able to handle some
javascript elements. However, if you're making a general information
page on a topic, you should make your page as clear and accessible as
possible.

So, that's just one aspect of code that you may not see eye to eye
with your user about. However, explain it to them in easy to
understand concepts, and they will have an easier time comprehending.

 

[Travis Newbury]

It's hard explain to someone non technically-savvy about what's the
best way to code a website - they often want a feature that isn't
exactly in line with coding standards....

As it should be, it is their site. You can tell them all the benefits
in the world about how a properly coded website is more acessible, or
that usibility is better, bla bla bla. But they don't care. Their
competition's website has a fancy purple spinner, and theirs should
too.

After you explain the advantages of a propperly coded website, it is in
their ball park. If they want the fancy purple spinny thing, then give
it to them, or they will take their business to someone that will.

You can then walk away knowing you did the honorable thing. But
someone else walks away with a paycheck for making the fancy purple
spinner....

 

[Andy Dingley]

If they want the fancy purple spinny thing, then give
it to them, or they will take their business to someone that will.

It depends on what your role is. If you're there as a lowly web-grunt
(someone who codes what they're told), then get spinning. If you're
there as a consultant (someone who offers to make ecomm work), then you
have to explain to them why they shouldn't use the dancing penguin, or
else you leave gracefully. The last thing you want is for your
long-term reputation to become "The guy who made the awful site for
FooCo where you couldn't see the content for purple spinny stuff".

 

[Neredbojias]

With neither quill nor qualm, Jeff Fritz quothed:

I've started out by coding websites for myself - but eventually have
moved on to making websites as projects for people. Originally, when
doing personal websites, I had the leisure of taking my time and coding
however I wanted - however, when coding for someone else, they often
want things done a certain way.

It's hard explain to someone non technically-savvy about what's the
best way to code a website - they often want a feature that isn't
exactly in line with coding standards. So basically, you have to
explain to them in as simple terms as possible, the advantages of
coding according to web standards.

For example, take excessive javascript code - many clients or users
might want you to make a website that has some fancy flashing text or
needless image effects using javascript. It might work fine for your
user, who has a mainstream windows PC that runs these effects fine.

However, you need to make your user realize that not everyone's PC is
equal - and thus as a result, javascript in one person's browser
might completely bog down their computer's resources so much, that it
virtually renders it useless. In others, javascript might not even be
supported. So, any functionality of the site that relies on javascript
will be inaccessible by these users.

It's impossible to track down all of the combinations of users'
operating systems, computer speeds, and browser software, so it is best
just to stay away from javascript altogether. When making an
informational or commercial website, it's very important to take your
audience into consideration.

If you're making a vending site that sells computer parts, most likely
your audience will be computer savvy and may be able to handle some
javascript elements. However, if you're making a general information
page on a topic, you should make your page as clear and accessible as
possible.

So, that's just one aspect of code that you may not see eye to eye
with your user about. However, explain it to them in easy to
understand concepts, and they will have an easier time comprehending.

You could always add a link on the page to shut off the active content
crap.

 

[Rossz]

If you're making a vending site that sells computer parts, most likely
your audience will be computer savvy

And therefore will have wisely turned it off!

If you use real world figures for browser usage, you will lose this
argument. The vast majority of people are running Window boxes and
Internet Explorer with the default settings.

Personally, I work with the standard and only deviate when absolutely
necessary to get something to work in IE. I _NEVER_ use javascript in
such a way that it is required. For example, I'll use javascript to set
the focus in the first element of a form, it's a nice feature if it
works and the page doesn't break if javascript is turned off. Using
javascript based links to open other pages breaks all kinds of shit,
including (and this might get their attention) "Search Engine
Optimization" (I'm trying to be buzzword complient).

A few simple arguments.

1. Standards complient pages are easier to maintain.
2. Standards complient pages load faster.
3. Standards complient pages make search engines happier.
4. Standards complient pages are easier to make accessible to people
with disabilities (e.g. blind).
5. Standards complient pages usually use less bandwidth
6. Javascript should be used to improve the experience for the user, but
the lack of it should never prevent the page from being usable.
7. Javascript is usually not Search Engine friendly.
8. Flash is not Search Engine friendly (besides, it's evil).
9. ActiveX is evil incarnate and anyone who uses it is going to hell.
Plus, God kills a kitten and a puppy each time someone uses ActiveX.

 

[Mark Parnell]

For example, I'll use javascript to set
the focus in the first element of a form, it's a nice feature if it
works

I beg to differ. Unless there is only one form element on the page, and
the form is the whole purpose of the page (e.g. Google's home page), I
find it really annoying.

 

[Nick Theodorakis]

I beg to differ. Unless there is only one form element on the page, and
the form is the whole purpose of the page (e.g. Google's home page), I
find it really annoying.

It annoys me. I tend to use the backspace button to go back in teh
browser history, and I hate it when the cursor gets "stuck" in a form
field.

Nick

 

[rossz]

In our last episode, Rossz <[email protected]> pronounced to
alt.html:




I beg to differ. Unless there is only one form element on the page, and
the form is the whole purpose of the page (e.g. Google's home page), I
find it really annoying.

I agree. I wouldn't set the focus in a search box that's way in the
lower right corner, but when the whole purpose of a particular page is
the form, then setting the focus simply makes life easier.

 

[dorayme]

It depends on what your role is. If you're there as a lowly web-grunt
(someone who codes what they're told), then get spinning. If you're
there as a consultant (someone who offers to make ecomm work), then you
have to explain to them why they shouldn't use the dancing penguin, or
else you leave gracefully. The last thing you want is for your
long-term reputation to become "The guy who made the awful site for
FooCo where you couldn't see the content for purple spinny stuff".

Well said indeed!

dorayme

 

[Travis Newbury]

It depends on what your role is. If you're there as a lowly web-grunt
(someone who codes what they're told), then get spinning. If you're
there as a consultant (someone who offers to make ecomm work), then you
have to explain to them why they shouldn't use the dancing penguin, or
else you leave gracefully.

So you are telling me that if company XYZ came up to you and said "here
is a contract that will pretty much set you up for the next year or
two, but we want a dancing penguin. Your reply would be "I am sorry,
my web morals will not let me make such a site for you."

Mine would be, "Will it be dancing to the right or left, and what color
would you like...."

In the real world (outside of alt.html) It is easier to sell a client
on wiz-bang than not. (And wiz-bang != ecomm not working)

 

[Travis Newbury]

Well said indeed!

So you explain to them and they still want it. Do you leave? I don't.
I make the purple spinner work.

 

[Dylan Parry]

Using a pointed stick and pebbles, Travis Newbury scraped:

So you are telling me that if company XYZ came up to you and said "here
is a contract that will pretty much set you up for the next year or
two, but we want a dancing penguin. Your reply would be "I am sorry,
my web morals will not let me make such a site for you."

My reply would be "Okay. I'll look in to that 'dancing penguin thing' as
I have a feeling it will be /very/ expensive, but sure I'll try hard to
give you the best dancing penguin there is." Then I would spend the next
two years procrastinating about the penguin, give them something much
better and they would forget they ever asked for it.

 

[Travis Newbury]

My reply would be "Okay. I'll look in to that 'dancing penguin thing' as
I have a feeling it will be /very/ expensive, but sure I'll try hard to
give you the best dancing penguin there is." Then I would spend the next
two years procrastinating about the penguin, give them something much
better and they would forget they ever asked for it.

The procrastinating might get you fired by that one Marketing VP who is
anal about his dancing Penguin. (And you are making the assumption
that the dancng penguin and ecommerce are mutually exclusive)

I am not saying it is "right", or even in the best interest for the
company, but it is the way the real world works. Humans (especially us
rich bloviating corporate Americans) like shiny things.

 

[Andy Dingley]

So you are telling me that if company XYZ came up to you and said [..]

Your reply would be "I am sorry,
my web morals will not let me make such a site for you."

Yes. It's only a contract. I have to think about three things:

Do I want to do it?

Does it pay?

Where does it leave me afterwards, in terms of what I want to do next?

Now penguin wrangling fails on the first and usually third (maybe I like
penguins, I just don't think they're appropriate here). There's also no
real implication that it will pay any better than some other contract.

a contract that will pretty much set you up for the next year or
two, but we want a dancing penguin.

I haven't had a contract that would "set me up for the next year or two"
since 2000 or so. The stuff out there these days is penny-pinching
little dog-ends of jobs. You have to look at the big picture for one
thing because the little pictures just aren't a big enough bribe any
more!


Incidentally, I finished a contract today. At one point I said, directly
to my boss' face, that the line of CSS he wanted (absolute font size in
pixels) was written on a post-it in front of him. I explained to him
what it did, why I wouldn't use it, and quite clearly not a word of it
sank in. I then told him I simply _wasn't_ going to code such a line
into the CSS because it was Wrong and that if that ended the contract
there and then I was quite happy about it. The site is still using ems
as it ought and I was there for some time afterwards.

Now maybe tomorrow they'll change it, but that's their right. I'll cut
corners if they want, but I'll not do something that's just plain wrong.

 

[TJ]

So you are telling me that if company XYZ came up to you and said
[..]

Your reply would be "I am sorry,
my web morals will not let me make such a site for you."
Yes.

Bull.

It's only a contract.

"*only* a contract"?

I have to think about three things:

Do I want to do it?

Does it pay?

Where does it leave me afterwards, in terms of what I want to do next?

So which is it? Is it that you don't really care about feeding your family
as long as your "web morals" remain intact, or are you independantly
wealthy?

Now penguin wrangling fails on the first and usually third (maybe I
like penguins, I just don't think they're appropriate here). There's
also no real implication that it will pay any better than some other
contract.

So long as it pays? Personally, I don't care.

I haven't had a contract that would "set me up for the next year or
two" since 2000 or so. The stuff out there these days is
penny-pinching little dog-ends of jobs. You have to look at the big
picture for one thing because the little pictures just aren't a big
enough bribe any more!

Without even realizing it, you just shot down your own argument.

Incidentally, I finished a contract today. At one point I said,
directly to my boss' face, that the line of CSS he wanted (absolute
font size in pixels) was written on a post-it in front of him. I
explained to him what it did, why I wouldn't use it, and quite
clearly not a word of it sank in.

Exactly. Your boss want's what HE (and likely HIS boss) wants, NOT what YOU
want.

I then told him I simply _wasn't_
going to code such a line into the CSS because it was Wrong and that
if that ended the contract there and then I was quite happy about it.

Hopefully he fired your ass right on outta there. I would have.

The site is still using ems as it ought and I was there for some time
afterwards.

Now maybe tomorrow they'll change it, but that's their right. I'll cut
corners if they want, but I'll not do something that's just plain
wrong.

You should quit if they ever ask you to make a purple, spinny-thing.

 

[Travis Newbury]

Incidentally, I finished a contract today. At one point I said,
directly to my boss' face, that the line of CSS he wanted
(absolute font size in pixels) was written on a post-it in front
of him. I explained to him what it did, why I wouldn't use it,
and quite clearly not a word of it sank in. I then told him I
simply _wasn't_ going to code such a line into the CSS because
it was Wrong and that if that ended the contract there and then
I was quite happy about it.

Though the example is anecdotal, Knowing you from this group it is
exactly what you should have done. (I would have been disappointed
had you said anything to the contrary.)

On the other hand, in similar situation (with web applications not
websites, but equally anecdotal) I have told contracts that what
they wanted to do was either stupid or at the very lease
ineffective as a solution. Sometimes they change, some times they
don't. I stick with them in either case. And I too get called
back on a regular basis. Sometimes to fix what I told them was
broke in the first place.

Had that contract let you go you would have won because you did
what you believed was right. I do the same.

 

[TJ]

Travis Newbury wrote:

Had that contract let you go you would have won because you did
what you believed was right. I do the same.

Then you're as big a fool as the OP.

You're asking me to believe that you'd deliberately throw away money over
"web-morals" = nothing?

What the hell? If you're not trolling this group is more f-ed up than I
thought.

It's like some kind of Televangelist thing with bits of useful info thrown
in for distraction. LOL!

Y'all GO!

Please! You ALL keep fighting the "good fight". PLEASE!

Y'all just keep making sure your sites are drab, dull, W3C compliant, and
boring.

Meanwhile? I'll keep giving my clients all the purple, spinny-things they
want, snatch tips from this group, and continue taking $ out of your
collective pockets.

Sheesh! For folks that are so obviously *very* intelligent, most of ya
sure are stupid in your own special ways.

 

[dorayme]

So you explain to them and they still want it. Do you leave? I don't.
I make the purple spinner work.

You make it sound simpler than it is in practice. I have said
this before, a lot depends on the respect the co have for you.
You are usually, if you are any good and they are not very bad,
able to influence them to some extent. Sure, things get to be a
matter of compromise. But, for what it is worth, I like Andy
Dingley's starting position on this. You are a disgraceful
trollop Travis, a taxi for hire, a mercenary with no morals... I
want that you should attend my Thurs evening Ethics classes...
(Credit card details please?)



dorayme

(Do note the smiley Travis, and you also take a couple of chill
pills, I took mine as you suggested!)

 

[dorayme]

My reply would be "Okay. I'll look in to that 'dancing penguin thing' as
I have a feeling it will be /very/ expensive, but sure I'll try hard to
give you the best dancing penguin there is." Then I would spend the next
two years procrastinating about the penguin, give them something much
better and they would forget they ever asked for it.

The procrastinating might get you fired by that one Marketing VP who is
anal about his dancing Penguin. (And you are making the assumption
that the dancng penguin and ecommerce are mutually exclusive)

I am not saying it is "right", or even in the best interest for the
company, but it is the way the real world works. Humans (especially us
rich bloviating corporate Americans) like shiny things.

No, Parry has hit the nail on the head about stalling,
influencing etc. That is the real world. You have a fantasy
picture of a hard bitten remorseless uncompromising world. Don't
be so cynical.

dorayme

 

[dorayme]

Now maybe tomorrow they'll change it, but that's their right. I'll cut
corners if they want, but I'll not do something that's just plain wrong.

I like this. I like it a lot. Travis, you are facing a solid
wall of integrity here. Stop fighting, You are lost.

dorayme